playing pitch strategy final report

Part of the Scott Wilson Group

Birmingham City Council

Playing Pitch Strategy

Final Report (revised) November 2011

Birmingham City Council Playing Pitch Strategy

Table of Contents Page INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1 BIRMINGHAM CITY – CONTEXT FOR THE STRATEGY 2 METHODOLOGY 3 SUMMARY OF THE RESEARCH COMPLETED 4 AUDIT OVERVIEW 7 ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS SUMMARY – MAJOR SPORTS 11 ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS SUMMARY – MINOR SPORTS 32 POLICY OPTIONS APPRAISAL 38 RECOMMENDATIONS 40 Appendices APPENDIX 1 - STUDY CONSULTEES APPENDIX 2 - STRATEGY CONTEXT APPENDIX 3 - DETAILED METHODOLOGY APPENDIX 4 - SUPPLY AUDIT SPREADSHEET APPENDIX 5 - DEMAND AUDIT SPREADSHEET APPENDIX 6 - ASSESSMENT SUMMARIES APPENDIX 7a - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – CITY APPENDIX 7b - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – EDGBASTON APPENDIX 7c - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – ERDINGTON APPENDIX 7d - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – HALL GREEN APPENDIX 7e - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – HODGE HILL APPENDIX 7f - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – LADYWOOD APPENDIX 7g - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – NORTHFIELD APPENDIX 7h - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – PERRY BARR APPENDIX 7i - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – SELLY OAK APPENDIX 7j - PLAYING PITCH MODEL – SUTTON COLDFIELD APPENDIX 7k - PLAYING PITCH MODEL - YARDLEY


Maps Map 1 All Playing Pitch Sites by ownership – City Wide Maps 1a-1j All Playing Pitch Sites by ownership – By Constituency Area (x10) Map 2 All sites with Football Pitches – City Wide Maps 2a-2j All sites with Football Pitches – By Constituency Area (x10) Map 3 All sites with Cricket Pitches – City Wide Maps 3a-3j All sites with Cricket Pitches – By Constituency Area (x10) Map 4 All sites with Rugby Pitches – City Wide Maps 4a-4j All sites with Rugby Pitches – By Constituency Area (x10) Map 5 All sites with Synthetic Turf Pitches – City Wide Maps 5a-5j All sites with Synthetic Turf Pitches – By Constituency Area (x10) Map 6 Cricket Clubs and Birmingham Parks League locations Map 7 Rugby Club locations


www.scottwilson.com www.strategicleisure.co.uk 1

Introduction and Background The Project Strategic Leisure (SL) was commissioned in February 2010 by Birmingham City Council to develop a Playing Pitch Strategy. The strategy is based on an eight stage assessment (following the process detailed in Toward a Level Playing Field the Sport England and CCPR 1 guidance on developing local playing pitch strategies) of supply and demand for football, cricket, rugby union and hockey. The assessment of major sports (football, cricket, rugby and hockey), where participation rates are relatively high has included ‘sub-area’ analysis on the basis of the 10 local Constituency Areas. Other ‘minor’ pitch sports are also considered, specifically: rugby league, American football, lacrosse, Gaelic football, Kabaddi, softball and baseball, rounders and outdoor volleyball. These assessments have relied on qualitative data rather than detailed numerical modelling. This report is supported by a number of technical appendices which provide more detail on the context for the strategy, assessment methodology and evidence base. This report provides an overview of the findings of the assessments completed, with a focus on the key priorities and recommendations resulting from this. It therefore focuses more on the results of the assessment and recommendations and priorities, rather than the research process and methods. Strategy Aim and Objectives The Strategy’s overarching aim is: “To guide the future provision and management of old and new sports pitches in the area in the context of national policy and local sports development criteria” The strategy is needed essentially to update research and evidence relating to playing pitch supply and demand. Although an existing strategy was developed in 2004, this is out of date and no longer provides a sound evidence base for local planning policy. In short, the Playing Pitch Strategy is necessary to: • Protect facilities against development pressures, and specifically residential proposals on land in,

and around, urban areas; • Identify an appropriate facility mix to best meet predicted population growth and changes to demand

levels; • Provide sufficient information to inform planning decisions for sites where there are applications for

change of use pending; • Provide a framework identifying priorities for investment and prioritisation of support for funding

applications; • Address ‘demand’ pressures created as a result of specific sports development pressures e.g. mini

soccer, move to use of artificial pitches by hockey; and • Inform future policies on the Council’s role as a provider and enabler of pitch provision, and in

particular provide a steer on leasing sites to established sports clubs. The playing pitch assessment used to inform the strategy considers all provision in the city, including facilities provided privately and those available at the Universities.

1 1 CCPR – Central Council for Physical Recreation



Birmingham City – Context for the Strategy A detailed review of the context for the strategy, including the key demographic, social and policy context is included as Appendix 2. This has identified a number of key considerations for the strategy, including: • High Population density and variances in projected population increases: The current population of

just over 1m is expected to grow significantly, up to 1.1 million in the next 5-10 years. This growth is not expected to be proportionate across the city. Specific concentrations of growth are expected across the central belt of the city. The area assessments have taken this into account, using specific area profiles and projections. The overall population of more than 1m is put into context when looking at population density – the city covers 267.8 square km. Its population density of more than 3,500 people per square km, compares with just 377.2 people per square km for England. This has implications for facilities and their catchments with effectively more people (and potentially more participants) living within the vicinity of a playing pitch.

• Current planning policy and local standards are based on an out of date evidence base and national

standards: Although successful in preventing loss of pitches in the main, planning policy and local standards of provision needs to be based on up to date evidence. The playing pitch assessment will provide up to date evidence on the adequacy of provision in relation to quantity and quality, for individual sports and across the 10 Constituency areas. It will also provided recommended levels (standards) of provision to meet estimated future demand.

• Playing Pitches have an important role to play in meeting the overall priorities and objectives for

community sport: A high quality, accessible supply of facilities is key to delivering the proposed sport and physical activity entitlement and meet the development priorities of a number of sports. The playing pitch assessment will provide evidence on where there are inequalities and specific issues relating to the supply of playing pitches.

• Variances in sports participation rates: There are significant variances in sports participation rates

generally across the city, with some of the variance being attributable to deprivation and the ethnicity of the local population. There is more than a 10% difference in participation rates across the constituency areas – 24.3% of adults take part in 3x30 sessions of sport per week in Edgbaston, compared to just 12.0% in Ladywood. The playing pitch assessment will provide further insight on team generation rates for the sports assessed and through area assessments and highlight specific variances by sport locally.

• Low satisfaction with sports facilities: In addition to participation rates, KPI6 of the Active People Survey

measures satisfaction with local sports provision. There is relatively low satisfaction within Birmingham (60.8%) compared to 66.6% nationally. This figure has also fallen from the level recorded in the previous survey. The satisfaction with pitch facilities specifically was assessed as part of the playing pitch strategy

• Capital investment opportunities through the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme will

be limited: The BSF programme has been cancelled resulting in a limited re-build programme across the city. The programme was planned to take place over six phases and include the rebuild or refurbishment of 80 new schools, 6 new Academies and a number of dedicated pupil referral units. The playing pitch strategy will need to take account of this reduced investment and the potential inclusion of only 10 schools.

• Deficiencies in neighbouring authorities: There is a deficiency in pitch provision in a number of the

neighbouring authorities (specifically in relation to areas bordering parts of the city). This may have implications for imported and exported demand – that is because of deficiencies in areas on the city border, teams from outside the city may seek provision within. Conversely, where there are deficiencies within the city, options for local clubs and teams to access provision in neighbouring authorities may also be limited

• A significant increase in demand since the previous Playing Pitch Strategy: The 2003 Strategy

identified demand equating to 850 teams (across the sports assessed). The audit compiled for this strategy has identified in excess of 1,900 teams. Where as demand has more than doubled, supply has remained relatively static. This has obvious implications for assessment results and the ability of existing supply to cater for growth in sports.



Methodology and a summary of the research completed The strategy has been developed using the guidance developed by Sport England and the Central Council for Physical Recreation (CCPR) detailed in Towards a Level Playing Field. This is explained in more detail in Appendix 3. This moves away from the application of generic provision standards (as currently used in UDP and Parks Strategy) and advocates focused research to identify local demand and supply, factor in qualitative factors and assess the adequacy of provision relating to quantity, quality and access for individual sports. Fundamentally this means the assessment results will be different. Deficiencies recorded using one method will not necessarily be recorded using the other, and vice versa. A detailed account of the methodology, analysis toolkits and assessment parameters is provided in the detailed technical report. The Eight Stage Playing Pitch Model The methodology comprises of an eight-stage approach, as summarised overleaf in the figure below. This involves a number of specific research tasks to build a comprehensive audit. A series of toolkits are used to analyse the data collected with the resulting assessment figures interpreted in consideration to the local context and results of stakeholder consultation. Figure 1 -– Playing Pitch Assessment Methodology Stage Description and Key Output

Stage 1 Identification of the number of teams Demand is established through a count of the number of teams for each sport using a variety of information sources, including pitch booking records, league handbooks, and a club survey. Latent demand and the impact of future population projections are also considered.

Stage 2 Calculating home games per team per week In a ‘normal’ situation for all sports, the number of home games is calculated as 0.5 of the total number of teams, representing weekly ‘home’ and ‘away’ fixtures.

Stage 3 Assessing Total Number of Home Games per week This is the product of Stages 1 and 2, and is therefore not independent. The resultant figure indicates how many games have to be accommodated in the study area in the average week.

Stage 4 Establishing Temporal Demand for Games This stage assesses the proportion of total home games played on each day. The data is expressed as a percentage of total weekly demand. This Stage will determine what percentage of all games is played on a Saturday for example.

Stage 5 Defining pitches used / required on each day This is the product of Stages 3 and 4, and is not therefore independent. The resultant figure will indicate the pitches used/required on each day and time e.g. Saturday p.m.

Stage 6 Establishing pitches available An accurate assessment of supply is produced which distinguishes between pitches for each sport and between ownership (public, private, voluntary and educational sites). In modelling the existing situation, only pitches currently available for the appropriate days/times will be relevant.

Stage 7

Assessing the Findings The requirements to accommodate demand assessed at Stage 5 are then compared with the facilities as available at Stage 6. If the existing situation has been accurately modelled there should be either a good numerical fit between requirements and facilities available, or even ‘surplus’ provision on some days.

Stage 8 Identifying policy options and solutions A range of policy options can be developed, such as new provision or pitch improvements, to help the problems identified at Stage 7. The method can then be used to further assess the impact of policy options, and contribute to the selection of the most cost-effective solution.

Adapted from Toward a Level Playing Field – Sport England and CCPR (Page 11)



Summary of the research completed The key research methods, success of these and explanations of any specific assumptions made in the application of the PPM are summarised below and explained in more detail in the technical report. Summary of auditing techniques and data gathering Supply audit The current supply of pitches was established through undertaking a series of data review, research and consultation exercises. These consisted of: • Review of information held by Birmingham City Council relating to the supply of playing pitches – this

included reviewing lists held by Sport and Leisure Officers, the listing compiled as part of the previous Playing Pitch Assessment, and a review of GIS datasets and mapping layers.

• Review of aerial photography to cross check all listed facilities identified and highlight any potential gaps

in current information

• Review of information published on relevant websites containing supply information – including Active Places, school and university websites;

• More than 375 site visits to all listed pitch facilities. ‘Quality audits’ formed part of these visits and were

completed using the Sport England Non-Technical Visual Assessment proforma. Visits were conducted between April and July 2010.

• Consultation with key stakeholders (Governing Bodies of Sport, Council Officers from Education,

Planning and Parks Services) – this was completed predominantly via the Steering Group and Key Consultation Groups established that met four times through the research process. In addition supply information was collected and corroborated through meetings with Parks Managers and Constituency Area Sport and Leisure Managers.

• A postal survey of all council and private schools and further education providers. For Council

schools the survey was promoted via the e-briefing system and through a number of consultative networks internally. The survey was supplemented by follow up telephone consultation to boost the response rate – consultation was completed with 80% of all schools. Key questions were asked about facilities on site, use of these, and their quality and accessibility status (i.e. whether arrangements for secured community use are in place).

• Meetings with University representatives and tours of facilities owned and operated by three of the

Universities within the city to establish the quantity, quality and accessibility of pitches available to local community clubs.

• A postal survey to all identified sports clubs within the city – this focussed on demand information (see

below) but also asked clubs about the (quantity, quality and accessibility of) facilities they use.

Demand Audit In establishing the current demand for pitches a series of research and consultation exercises were completed, specifically: • Consultation with NGB representatives for all the sports included in the study scope to identify and review

existing information, help promote the consultation and research planned and encourage clubs to participate in providing data

• An initial sports club questionnaire sent to identified clubs within the authority area and in some cases

beyond – nearly 1,000 surveys were distributed to all identified clubs (by post and e-survey) identified by the



respective NGB representatives drawing on their databases and records e.g. FA’s CAS database and Local Area Data (LADS), and the RFU’s Club Pack listings. As outlined above this asked a number of questions relating to both demand and supply in addition to key issues and challenges experienced, and planned growth / developments expected in the future

• Additional telephone consultation with key sports clubs (focusing on non-respondents) to secure

acceptable response rates (see below). • A review of booking information from pitch sites within the City where applicable – this was limited as

there is no ‘master’ booking record or listing of pitches operated by Birmingham City Council. There are a number of different management and booking processes in place.

• A review of League Handbooks and team listings, online forums and related information where available. • Attendance at football league meetings and other sports specific meeting forums where possible to

explain and promote the consultation programme. • A review of relevant websites for clubs and leagues, predominantly aimed at ‘gap filling’ information

collected. • Consultation with local area Sport and Leisure Officers, Constituency Staff and other local stakeholders

to help corroborate information collected and identify key gaps locally. • Consultation with League Secretaries (by survey and through a discussion group) to explore current and

future trends in demand (i.e. increasing/declining team numbers). The evidence base: survey response rates Final response rates for the surveys administered were: • Football Clubs – 50% of clubs (266 of 525 clubs consulted, representing 60% of all identified teams). • Cricket Clubs – 93% of affiliated clubs (26 of 28 identified) and 46 of the 80 (58%) Birmingham Parks

League teams. Consultation was also completed with League Organisers of Local Leagues and other developmental initiatives to gain views about facilities used.

• Rugby Union - 100% of clubs (16 or 16 clubs identified) – this has included three clubs based just outside of the city but drawing their membership from within.

• Hockey – 100% of clubs (8 clubs consulted) • Rugby League - 100% response rate (1 club) • Kabaddi - 100% response rate (1 club and the KabaddIAN project) • Softball/Baseball - 66% response rate (2 clubs out of 3 identified) • Rounders - 100% response rate (1 league) • Outdoor Volleyball - 100% response rate (No formal clubs, consultation with only NGB) • Gaelic Football - 60% response rate (3 clubs out of 5 identified) • American Football - Consultation with the NGB only The above response rate broadly equates to consultation with more than half of all identified clubs (representing more than 60% of identified teams). This is considered to provide a robust sample, supplemented by the views of wider stakeholders, on which to form a set of clear conclusions.

Quantifying non-club/team demand for the major sports Although the assessment is focused on community sport, with identified teams playing regular league/competitive fixtures as the ‘demand unit’, the PPM prompts the need to consider other demands placed on sports pitches. Some attempt has therefore been made to do this using the following assumptions. Further Education College and University sport (from the 4 Universities located within the city),in terms of formal teams have been included within the demand audit and therefore included within the modelling. This is on the basis of some ‘cross over’ in both demand and supply. That is, some University teams play in local



community leagues (part of demand) and the pitches provided by the Universities accommodate community use (and are used by a number of local teams for matches and training). School sport and team equivalents generated by PE use of facilities has also been partially quantified and factored into the modelling accordingly. Although the focus of the assessment and resulting strategy is community sport, consideration has been given to the demand generated by school sport (Physical Education and School teams taking part in local competitions) and the use of available supply. In Birmingham many school sites are available (and in use) for local teams to hire and use as home venues. Additionally, the Council has in the region of 30 playing field sites classified as off site ‘education assets’. These are playing pitches on standalone sites available as a resource for those schools without their own on site facilities. These pitches are also available to the community, and as a result a number of these sites accommodate significant education and community use. Accounting for and factoring in school use of pitches has been quantified slightly differently across the four major sports identified, depending on the availability and quality of information available. Estimating and projecting future demand For population growth figures, a suite of reports produced by Exeprian for the Council outlining changes in the next 10 years have been used. These provide a more accurate picture of population on a local Constituency Area basis than overall City wide projections. Population projections vary significantly across the city. While population growth across most constituency areas appears to be projected at 4-5% in most areas, it is markedly higher in Ladywood. The team generation rates established for each area have been used to identify ‘organic’ growth that is likely to occur as a result of this based on change to the ‘active population’. Target growth rates for each of the sports were agreed with the appropriate NGB or local representative. The growth rates for sports used are: • Football: locally developed targets for the next 3 years – equating to a 2% growth in Mini Soccer teams,

1.8% growth in Youth teams (girls and boys collectively) and around 1% increase in Adult teams • Cricket: a 1% year on year growth in the number of participants • Rugby Union: a 2% growth year on year in adult players up to 2015, equating to an average of 1 additional

adult team per club (target in line with the RFU Strategic Plan) • Hockey: Growth as projected by the individual clubs consulted – no specific national or regional target has

been set. Quality Audit and Assessment The quality of pitches has been assessed using a non-technical visual assessment proforma. This is part of the Towards a Level Playing Field toolkit and is included within the technical report appendices. The quality proforma collects a range of information about pitches based on a visual inspection. Specific criteria rated include: • Grass cover; • Length of grass; • Size of pitch (and suitability); • Slope; • Evenness; • Presence of common pitch problems; and • Availability of changing rooms.

Each pitch is scored out of a possible 100% and graded on a quality scale from ‘Poor’ through to ‘Excellent’. A proforma is also used to provide a quality rating for the ancillary facilities serving the site and rates the quality of the changing accommodation, parking facilities and general site access. In making recommendations and interpreting assessment results, pitch quality scores have been considered alongside sports club ratings of the facilities they use. A summary of the scores for all pitches identified is included in the report appendices.



Audit Overview Supply of playing pitches in Birmingham A total of 276 playing pitch sites currently in use have been identified. These provide a total of 686 playing pitches across the sports assessed. Not all are available for community use currently. Ownership, management and community access Pitches are owned and managed by a number of different organisations and available through a significant number of different management and hiring arrangements. For ease of analysis, three broad ownership categories have been used: Birmingham City Council; Private; and Further/Higher Education. Figure 2 - Pitches by ownership and community access

Ownership/Management Number of sites

Number of pitches

% (of sites) in community use

Birmingham City Council* 205 514 96%**

Private Providers 57 118 89%

Further / Higher Education 14 54 57%

TOTALS 276 686 67% **Not all sites currently have pitches operational

Birmingham City Council Pitches - Management and access The management of public pitches varies significantly in terms of their management and access arrangements, with some managed centrally through Sport and Leisure services, and others, booked locally. Overall there is no one central database of pitch facilities. On-site school pitches are managed directly, with decisions made about community use made by the individual schools. Although guidance about general asset management and the considerations for community use are provided by the Education Assets team, specific arrangements, policies and practice is determined by the school locally. Naturally this will create a variety of different arrangements and the ‘offer’ available to local clubs. A significant number of schools do not have access to on site playing pitch provision. These schools (at least in theory) have access to a number of off site facilities (‘unattached’ playing fields). No overall records are kept centrally in relation to which schools use these facilities and when. Consultation with some schools suggests many do not make use of the facilities because of resource issues and the practicalities with transport and time available for PE lessons. The unattached fields are also available for community use. However, without comprehensive records of timetabling and actual use by schools it is difficult to ascertain if certain sites are overplayed or underused. There are also some examples of sites adjacent to each other with different and unrelated booking arrangements. One example is Ninestiles School which is located next door to Fox Hollies Leisure Centre. The STP is booked through the leisure centre, but grass pitches via the school. There is also no criteria for prioritisation of pitch bookings, either geographically or on the basis of a bias towards those clubs likely to make the most significant impact on local sport and physical activity targets. These factors have the potential to lead to confusion for potential hirers. Indeed, feedback from League Secretaries consulted would suggest that this is the case in some areas. While some report a close working relationship Council officers in relation to booking, maintenance and dealing with issues, others report limited awareness of how to access facilities.



Birmingham City Council Pitches - Maintenance Across the stock of Birmingham City Council pitches there are a variety of maintenance providers. In many cases schools arrange their own management arrangements, including buying in the use of Council Grounds Maintenance Contractors to provide this service. As a result there are at least three but potential dozens of different maintenance providers across the education stock of facilities. Grounds maintenance often emerges as a key issue in any pitch assessment. Many clubs using public facilities in particular hold negative views about the facilities they use. However, not all their views are attributable to grounds maintenance specifications or quality of service. In many cases, because public pitches are often located within publicly accessible open space, there is a ‘quality ceiling’ i.e. they are open to unofficial sporting use and other recreational use. Although not always evident from site visits, there were some notable examples of sites which attract significant ‘other’ use. Both Perry Hall Park and Ward End Park for example were in use at the time of visits for informal sport and recreation. The key issues and challenges raised include: • Most complaints on grounds maintenance relate to the most heavily used sites – negative views

therefore may be the result of over use rather than inadequate maintenance. • Additional maintenance that is required (especially to make facilities safe) can be costly – one

Contractor estimates some sites require additional maintenance up to 50% more than planned work to deal with unofficial use.

• There are inherent challenges in providing quality facilities on open access sites – this is the case

particularly for cricket where wickets are difficult to protect. The audit also picked up some potential issues with how maintenance issues are reported back to the Council with some League Secretaries were not aware of who to contact to report issues. Consultants completing the audit also experienced issues with the dedicated Parks Service Line which is used for receiving feedback on the Council’s parks. However, it is understood that this has now been resolved and not all calls are filtered through the Contact Centre. Demand for playing pitches in Birmingham Formal demand: Community Clubs and Teams in Birmingham There are almost 700 clubs across the 13 sports assessed. The majority of these play regular fixtures in affiliated and unaffiliated leagues. The clubs generate in the region of 1,900 teams. Football, as in most areas of the country accounts for most of this – just over 70% of all teams identified are football teams playing regular games. The number of teams and clubs varies considerably across the 10 constituency areas. Team Generation Rates Team Generation Rates (TGRs) indicate how many people in a specified age group are required to generate one team. They are a useful indicator of levels of demand, particular for an area as large as Birmingham City (in terms of both population and geography) to identify variances in demand levels. The following table provides an overview of the TGRs for the four major sports for each of the Constituency areas. The implications of these are covered in more detail in the sport specific assessments and commentary on each area within the technical report



Figure 3 - Team Generation Rates

Team Generation Rates (major sports) – City Wide and by Constituency Area

Sport / team type

City overall

Edgbaston

Erdington

Hall G

reen

Hodge H

ill

Ladywood

Northfield

Perry Barr

Selly Oak

Sutton C

oldfield

Yardley

Mini Soccer 209 336 236 360 289 2,031 84 117 282 95 276 Youth Football – Boys 82 132 65 173 159 210 34 61 169 37 97 Youth Football – Girls 940 n/a 913 712 n/a n/a 346 1,090 1,688 235 4,162 Adult Football – Men 431 493 380 633 458 678 337 296 825 222 430

Football

Adult Football- Women 9,952 7,460 n/a n/a 25,272 5,576 6,966 5,927 7,863 4,251 n/a Junior Cricket – Boys 583 n/a 401 312 739 2,750 4,694 1,761 374 147 2,560 Junior Cricket – Girls 24,460 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 4,241 3,883 n/a Adult Cricket – Men 956 1,514 839 1,033 1,733 1,204 4,790 381 1,165 508 1,478

Cricket

Adult Cricket - Women 38,547 13,049 n/a 29,287 n/a n/a n/a 27,597 n/a 8,162 n/a Mini Rugby Union 1,936 1,550 n/a n/a 1,944 n/a 1,522 n/a 348 651 n/a Junior Rugby – Boys 1,128 1,488 1,606 n/a 1,184 n/a 488 n/a 301 411 n/a Junior Rugby – Girls 15,097 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,401 n/a n/a Adult Rugby – Men 4,768 2,836 4,701 12,432 7,773 n/a 2,268 11,485 2,515 3,865 3,408

Rugby Union

Adult Rugby - Women 42,759 n/a n/a n/a 23,461 n/a 19,486 n/a 11,094 15,870 n/a Junior Hockey – Boys 4,314 515 n/a 4,191 n/a n/a n/a n/a 2,829 n/a 3,643 Junior Hockey – Girls n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Adult Hockey – Men 4,592 884 n/a 6,649 n/a 14,924 n/a 24,553 3,417 1,666 10,968

Hockey

Adult Hockey – Women 9,537 1,399 n/a 25,092 n/a 27,882 n/a 23,708 n/a 3,401 n/a Figures show the number of residents (of the sport playing age) required to generate one team. For example across the city it takes 209 6-9 year olds to generate one mini soccer team – this compares to 1 team for every 336 residents aged 6-9 in Edgbaston. i.e. there is a ‘higher’ rate of team generation across the city than in Edgbaston. Highest and lowest TGRs shaded in red and green accordingly.



Variances in TGRs across the city The summary table of TGRs highlights a number of key findings in relation to variances in demand across the city. And in some areas there are no teams of key types (e.g. girl’s football). Ladywood stands out as ‘low performing’ generally in terms of TGRs and a low number (none in many cases) of teams for some sports. For the purpose of the comments made, ‘high’ TGRs refer to those indicating high levels of demand. Key observations are: • Generally the highest TGRs across the sports are recorded in Sutton Coldfield, Northfield, Selly

Oak and Edgbaston – this tallies with the Constituency areas where participation generally (as measured by the Active People survey) is highest

• High levels of demand for football in Sutton Coldfield and Northfield – there are relatively high levels of pitch provision also in these areas

• Low TGRs for mini and junior football in Ladywood – this area also has the lowest number of pitches per head of population, and the lowest number of community accessible football pitches of all the constituency areas

• Large gaps between the lowest and highest TGRs – for example, it requires almost 25 times more 6-9 years to generate a mini soccer team in the Ladywood area than in Northfield

• Highest levels of demand for cricket is Sutton Coldfield (Juniors and Women) and Perry Barr (adult men). Demand is high in Sutton Coldfield due to the location of 5 of 26 affiliated clubs being located in this area. The high adult men’s TGR is explained by a potentially high number of Birmingham Cricket and other local league teams from this area.

• Rugby TGRs are generally highest across Selly Oak – this is attributable to a number of clubs operating in this area, including the largest club (Moseley)

• Hockey TGRs are generally highest in Edgbaston – as with Rugby this is attributable to the location of a number of clubs, including the largest in this area (Edgbaston)

Comparison with national average TGRs Comparisons to TGRs nationally (i.e. to demonstrate whether demand in the city is generally higher or lower than other areas) is limited. The national database of TGRs is out of date and includes few studies completed within the last 3-4 years. It is also limited in relation to sports other than football (in relation to the number of studies included). A brief review focussing on football and cricket TGRs has been completed. Key observations are highlighted below. • Football

For mini soccer the national average is the generation of 4.56 teams per 1,000 populations. In Birmingham this is 4.8 suggesting that demand is broadly in line with national levels.

The city wide rate of team generation for junior boy’s football is 12.3 compared to the national average of 11.

For adult male football, figures from the national database indicate that on average 2.8 teams per 1,000 populations are generated. This rate for Birmingham is similar at around 2.3.

With regard to girls and Women’s football, team generation is also slightly higher than the national averages. For girls football 1.1 teams are generated locally compared to 0.81 nationally. For adults it is 0.1 teams compared to 0.08 nationally.

• Cricket Team Generation across junior cricket is low in Birmingham (at 1.7 teams per 1,000 for boys and 0 for

girls) compared to national figures (3.6 junior boys teams per 1,000). Adult rates in Birmingham are also below the national average. 1 team per 1,000 is generated in the city compared with almost 2 in nationally. The local rate though does vary, and is on par or above the national average in several areas.

In summary, areas where there are high TGRs tend to match those where there is higher participation rates generally in sport and physical activity. Consideration to TGR figures does also suggest there is some correlation between levels of supply and demand. That is, areas with a generally lower supply of pitches also have relatively low levels of demand and vice versa. This potentially indicates that a lack of facilities locally could stifle participation and cause latent demand in these areas.



Assessment and Analysis Summary – major sports More detailed summaries of the assessment results for each of the major sports included in the strategy are included in Appendix 6 of the report. These are supported by the raw supply and demand data (Appendices 4 and 5) and Playing Pitch Models (referred to as a PPM) in Appendices 7a-7k. The following section draws out the key data and assessment findings. Football Local clubs In summary there are 525 local football clubs generating 1,350 teams in total. These teams play in a number of different leagues predominantly across the weekend. University and Further Education teams affiliated to the FA are included in this list. School demand and team equivalents There are over 450 schools in the city, impacting on both supply and demand. In terms of demand, school teams participating in the Birmingham Schools Sports Federation competitions and in the West Midlands Schools competitions (as ‘area’ teams) have been considered Collectively these account for around 128 teams demanding pitches regularly during the week. An assumption has also been made about the level of PE use and the team equivalents. This is estimated to generate in the region of 850 team equivalents or 425 games per week. Supply A total of 406 football pitches have been identified, of which 284 (around 70%) are judged to have regular community use. Assessment A summary of the application of the eight stage model assessment for football is provided in the figures overleaf. Figures show the results of the current and future modelling (5 years time). Figures represent the surplus or deficiency in pitches required to meet demand, when modelled across the city, and when considered on a local area basis. Quantity of pitches A separate playing pitch model (PPM) has been used for each constituency area. This is to ensure that any differences in peak demand periods across mini, youth and adult football within the 10 constituency areas is accounted for. In the case of football in Birmingham, the peak day for all forms of the game in all areas is Sunday. However, the levels of demand (in terms of how much of the demand falls on these days) does vary from area to area. For example, although the peak demand period for Adult football across all 10 areas is on a Sunday morning, the amount of demand varies from 47% of all demand in Ladywood to 76% in Yardley. Quality of pitches Quality assessment results are also included in the table. Figures indicate the percentage of pitches within each area (and across the city as a whole) that were rated as at least ‘good’. These relate to community accessible pitches only.


www.scottwilson.com www.strategicleisure.co.uk

12

Figure 4 - Assessment Results - Pitch Quantity and Quality - Football: COMMUNITY TEAMS ONLY

FOOTBALL ASSESSMENT Results CITY WIDE

EDG

BA

STO

N

ERD

ING

TON

HA

LL G

REE

N

HO

DG

E H

ILL

LAD

YWO

OD

NO

RTH

FIEL

D

PER

RY

BA

RR

SELL

Y O

AK

SUTT

ON

C

OLD

FIEL

D

YAR

DLE

Y

Mini Soccer -57 0 -10 -4 -7 +2 -15 -8 +1 -15 -9

Youth FB -61 -2 -10 -8 -3 -5 -23 -10 0 -9 -10 CURRENT ASSESSMENT Surplus / deficiency in pitches

Adult FB +32 +10 +3 -6 -1 -6 -3 +15 +5 -1 +10

Mini Soccer -64 0 -11 -5 -8 +1 -16 -10 0 -15 -10

Youth FB -70 -3 -12 -9 -4 -7 -25 -11 -1 -9 -11 FUTURE ASSESSMENT Surplus / deficiency in pitches

Adult FB +20 +10 +2 -9 -2 -10 -6 +14 +4 -1 +9

Mini Soccer 38% 60% n/a 0% n/a 0% 0% 50% 60% 50% n/a

Youth FB 46% 67% 40% 100% 50% 0% 33% 78% 14% 43% 20% QUALITY ASSESSMENT %of pitches rated as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’

Adult FB 44% 50% 53% 75% 55% 16% 40% 34% 23% 80% 20%

Quantity deficiencies are most significant in Hall Green, Hodge Hill, Northfield and Sutton Coldfield. In these areas there is a deficiency in provision across Mini Soccer, Youth, and adult football pitches. In some cases deficiencies exist despite demand being spread across a number of days/times. For example in Northfield, less than half (46% of games) of the total demand for youth football takes place at peak time – despite this there is still a significant deficiency of 23 pitches. A net surplus, that is, considering all football provision and the total area it comprises, in comparison to what is required is only evident in the Edgbaston and Selly Oak areas. All the other areas are effectively deficient in terms of the number of football pitches currently available to meet the demand identified. Quality: Overall there are significant deficiencies in quality. Less than half (44%) of all community accessible pitches were rated positively (i.e. ‘good’ or ‘excellent’). More specifically only 38% of mini pitches rated as good, and less than half of junior and adult pitches falling into this category. This is despite pitches being audited at the end of the playing season and in some cases after re-seeding and essential maintenance works have been completed.



Factoring in other demand The deficiencies in football pitches are even more exaggerated when non-community demand is factored in. Although the school use of pitches is confined to ‘off-peak’ periods, the demand generated does add to the overall use of pitches. This is demonstrated in the table below where an indication is provided of the total number of potential games each week versus the number of pitches in the area. For the basis of the calculations an estimation has been made for all schools and pitches in the area, including those not in community use. This is based broadly on each school pitch being used for the equivalent of at least one full match each week. Use of school pitches for PE and school sport varies significantly according to time of year and sports included in the teaching programme. Figure 5 - Football - Impact of school demand /use of football pitches

Pitch Site Estimated games of football per week

Estimated Games per pitch

Edgbaston Constituency Area 89 games 2.1 games Erdington Constituency Area 119 games 4.5 games Hall Green Constituency Area 96 games 6.0 games Hodge Hill Constituency Area 109 games 2.8 games Ladywood Constituency Area 110 games 4.7 games Northfield Constituency Area 168 games 4.0 games Perry Barr Constituency Area 151 games 2.3 games Selly Oak Constituency Area 74 games 2.0 games Sutton Coldfield Constituency Area 159 games 2.5 games Yardley Constituency Area 97 games 6.0 games

Indicative average for the city 1,172 games 3.1 games

Latent demand In addition there are some indicators of latent or suppressed demand across the city. Although a comparison of TGRs for the city compared to national averages suggests relatively high levels of demand, there are some areas of the city where TGRs are significantly lower. If football development work is focused on these areas and TGRs were increased to mirror the city average, then the deficiencies in a number of areas would worsen considerably. Specifically in Ladywood, if TGRs for mini soccer were in line with the average for the city (1:209) then demand would equate to 29 teams (an increase of 25 on the current total). 29 teams playing at current peak periods would generate around 10 games per week. This would effectively reverse a theoretical surplus of 2 pitches into a deficit of 7. Some clubs have also identified potential issues relating to latent or suppressed demand. Over half of the clubs (52%) responding to the survey question on key issues identified ‘lack of appropriate facilities’ as a concern. Of these clubs, 42% also had plans to grow their membership which arguably will not be possible unless access to facilities is improved. Offset against this is feedback from league secretaries. Not all leagues with a stake in city based football responded to the consultation. However, it is clear from the consultation completed that some leagues have experienced considerable decline in their numbers, some have remained static in terms of overall numbers (some teams fold, some new teams join) while others have seen an increase. The key conclusion is that there are pockets of latent demand across the city. Some of this is attributable to low demand (as measured by TGRs) in certain Constituency areas and some is resulting from key local clubs’ development plans being stifled. For example, Continental Star FC, a large junior club drawing members from the Erdington and Perry Barr areas is anticipating a drop in membership resulting from issues with facilities. They currently play on pitches at the Holford Drive site, part of which has been sold. In addition, clubs such as Handsworth FC are seeking support to access additional facilities to accommodate more teams.



Club and league secretary views Pitch ratings and feedback from football clubs appear to match the results of the quality audit completed. 44% of pitches are rated as good or excellent using the non-technical visual assessment, compared to 48% of clubs rating pitches they use positively. This is important as it effectively provides both an independent objective view point and a user perspective with similar conclusions. Most notably the majority of pitches rated positively by clubs were in non-council ownership and were served by changing room facilities. Conversely, a large proportion of negative ratings were attributed to council owned and managed facilities. Club views on quality were generally backed up by feedback from local league secretaries, some of whom block book pitches and allocate them to individual teams. Leagues generally agreed that quality was lacking. In many cases this is attributable to the overall site facilities, and specifically a lack of changing room accommodation. However, League secretaries also highlighted a lack of awareness about the grounds maintenance and management regimes on key sites. Knowledge and awareness of what is proposed for each site (i.e. the specification) would enable more informed opinions on quality. That is, are poor quality pitches the result of poor or inadequate maintenance regimes, or more fundamental site issues? Overall there is a perception, in relation to Council provision that hire costs are increasing year on year, but the quality is not. A specific example of the poor perceptions of public facilities is provided by the Central Warwickshire Over 35’s league. The league has a policy that all new teams are permitted a maximum of one season using Council facilities after which teams must hire better quality facilities. Impact of quality on capacity If pitches are particularly poor then they may not be able to accommodate the number of games required to meet demand and this could increase any deficiency recorded or reduce surpluses. The results of the quality inspections have therefore, in line with guidance detailed in Toward a Level Playing Field been used to show how quality might affect capacity. The analysis completed suggests that around 44% of pitches currently available could, given the high quality of some of them, accommodate up to 3 games per week. If the overall theoretical capacity of pitches (based purely on their quality rating) is considered alongside the assessment results, then the following observations can be made: • The capacity of pitches across the stock currently available for community use is theoretically limited

by some average and below average pitches. • On average the number of games that could be accommodated across all pitches is 2.2 per week, 2.3

for Junior, and 2.3 for adult – this is less than the estimated number required to meet overall demand for football in the city. For example, based on community use only, there are an estimated 123 mini soccer games per week accommodated on a pitch stock with a theoretical capacity of 46 games.

Ancillary Facilities In terms of sites accommodating football pitches, only 72 sites with football pitches across the city are served by changing rooms. This overall picture worsens when considering actual pitch numbers with community use - only 45% (127) of all community use pitches served by changing rooms. Clubs also report significant issues in relation to access to changing rooms. Nearly half of the clubs responding to the survey (46%) report access to no changing facilities, or use of provision they rate as only ‘average’ or ‘poor’. Pitch Access Access has been considered from a number of perspectives. Specifically access to affordable facilities (i.e. cost of hire) and geographical access (i.e. proximity to quality facilities and average travel distances). Access has also been considered from a demand perspective, taking account of the capacity for new members at the clubs as identified through their survey responses. The assessment highlights that:



• 53% of clubs identify ‘internal funding’ as a key issue – that is many experience issues with running costs and balancing money in via subs etc with expenditure, including pitch hire charges

• The hire fees and charges that clubs pay vary significantly. These range from as little as £20 per match to clubs paying £100 for each game. Many clubs pay seasonal fees and block book facilities. This is on the basis of limited information received from clubs, so in reality variances could be more exaggerated

• 90% of clubs report capacity for new members suggesting that opportunities exist to play football – however, 60% of these do not estimate any growth and many (as reported earlier) raise issues with access to appropriate facilities

The average (mean) acceptable distance for participants to travel to access facilities reported by clubs is around 5.6 miles. More clubs travel further than 5 miles than less. This suggests, that teams are willing (or in some cases forced) to travel significant distances to access appropriate facilities. This is reinforced by responses to questions on future priorities. Nearly two thirds of clubs (64%) prioritise access to high quality facilities that involve more travel than lower quality facilities within the proximity of where they draw their membership from. Put simply, a significant number of clubs prioritise quality over location. Other issues and challenges The collection of raw data and application of the PPM overlooks a number of key characteristics of supply and demand that need to be highlighted and considered within the assessment conclusions. These include: • A relatively high number of multi-pitch sites without changing facilities – these include a number of

the Council’s sites. Capacity, quality and usability would all be greatly enhanced with ancillary facilities. The introduction of ancillary facilities on a relatively small number of sites would increase significantly the percentage of pitches served by changing rooms

• There is potentially a ‘gap’ in football facilities if viewing provision from the perspective of a tiered hierarchy of facilities, and the ability to provide a participation pathway at different levels. The city boasts two premiership football clubs with high quality facilities, a large number of public pitches and ‘park football’ facilities, but little in between. There is a potential gap in providing high quality community stadia facilities in the city. The Pilkington XXX facilities and potentially the Farnborough Road site represent the only two community stadia facilities in the city. Currently Birmingham City Ladies are playing their football outside of the city and Romulus FC are also looking for a suitable stadium facility to match facility requirements at the level they play.

Summary of assessment findings: Football The headlines:

1. The modelling results show that provision (in terms of quantity) is not sufficient. This is compounded in some cases by a heavy bias towards Sunday football. Peak demand for Mini Soccer, youth and adult football is on a Sunday (with some variances between morning and afternoon across the 10 areas). There are deficiencies recorded in 9 of the 10 constituency areas in at least one pitch type. In terms of estimating all demand against available supply, indications are that pitches need to accommodate at least 3 games per week in most areas to service demand.

2. There are quality deficiencies – less than half the pitches are rated as ‘good’ or better. Quality is particularly poor in Ladywood and Yardley where only 1 in 5 pitches are of a good standard. Less than half the clubs consulted rate their facilities positively. Poor quality pitch provision has potential implications for capacity. Pitches are required to accommodate 3 or more games in many areas to meet the demand identified.

3. Clubs are willing to travel considerable distances to access quality facilities – this is a clear indicator that there are deficiencies (quality and quantity) locally. Clubs are also paying a variety of different hire charge for facilities. The priority for 2/3 clubs is better quality facilities rather than those close to where their players reside.



Cricket

Local clubs In summary there are 140 local ‘clubs’ generating in the region of 371 teams in total. Not all the clubs are formal clubs running a number of teams. For the purpose of the assessment we have included single teams that play in the Birmingham Cricket League (BCL) and other local leagues as clubs. Cricket teams play in a number of different leagues across the week but predominantly across the weekend. School demand and team equivalents The exact number of schools playing formal cricket is not known. However, it is estimated by Warwickshire County Cricket board that there are in the region of 30-40 schools playing, generating up to 150 teams. It has not been possible to apportion these to specific constituency areas, but they have been factored into the analysis completed. In addition to school demand, an allowance has been made for demand generated by development squads, and a number of friendly pub teams. Supply A total of 109 cricket pitches have been identified, with 90 (around 82%) identified available for community use. A number of additional ‘potential’ community facilities were identified, predominantly pitches on School sites, and across some previously used public sites. In some cases these pitches were grassed areas available, and used for a variety of sports. Some investment would be needed at these venues suitable for community cricket. Assessment

Quantity of pitches A separate playing pitch model (PPM) has been used for each constituency area. This is to ensure that any differences in peak demand periods across mini, youth and adult football within the 10 constituency areas is accounted for. The levels of demand (in terms of how much of the demand falls on these days) does vary from area to area. For example, peak demand varies from 26% in Hall Green where demand is spread across most of the week to 72% of all demand in Ladywood falling on a Sunday afternoon. Quality of pitches Quality assessment results are also included in the table. Figures indicate the percentage of pitches within each area (and across the city as a whole) that were rated as at least ‘good’. These relate to community accessible pitches only.



Figure 6 - Assessment Results – Cricket: COMMUNITY TEAMS ONLY

Model Stage Results CITY WIDE

EDG

BA

STO

N

ERD

ING

TON

HA

LL G

REE

N

HO

DG

E H

ILL

LAD

YWO

OD

NO

RTH

FIEL

D

PER

RY

BA

RR

SELL

Y O

AK

SUTT

ON

C

OLD

FIEL

D

YAR

DLE

Y

CURRENT ASSESSMENT Surplus / deficiency in pitches

All cricket +16 +10 -2 +3 0 -7 0 +3 +2 +1 +2

FUTURE ASSESSMENT Surplus / deficiency in pitches

All cricket +9 +10 -3 +2 -1 -12 0 +2 0 +1 +1

QUALITY ASSESSMENT %of pitches rated as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’

Cricket Pitches 59% 80% 100% 50% 57% 75% 33% 18% 60% 92% 83%

Quantity: Assessed on a city wide level there is a modest surplus of pitches. This does not factor in any of the quality audit results and assumes that pitches are approved for local league matches. On a local level there are theoretical deficiencies in at least 3 of the 10 (Erdington, Hodge Hill and Ladywood) constituency areas, and only just adequate facilities in Northfield. Only the theoretical surplus (+10 pitches) in Edgbaston represents more than a modest one. There is significant growth in team numbers projected in Ladywood as a result of a larger estimated population growth. This equates potentially to the need for 5 additional pitches – the deficiency increases from -7 pitches to -12. Quality: Overall there are some significant deficiencies in quality, although these are less pronounced than for some other sports. More than half (59%) of all community accessible pitches were rated positively (i.e. ‘good’ or ‘excellent’). This is potentially skewed by the timing of the audits. All but 2 of the other pitches defined as having community use were rated as ‘average’. The majority of pitches (over three quarters) in Edgbaston, Ladywood, Sutton Coldfield and Yardley is viewed as being of ‘good’ quality. All community use pitches in Erdington were rated as ‘good’ or better. This contrasts with provision in Perry Barr (where much of the available supply is located) where less than 1 in 5 pitches are rated positively. These include facilities at Perry Hall Park.

Total of home games per week per each area, if totalled is larger than city wide figure – this is due to rounding up



Factoring in other demand The deficiencies shown within the assessment results need to be viewed in light of other potential demand. Nomadic pub teams and University teams (because they potentially play at peak times) have been included in the supply and demand assessment summarised in the figure above. Although no specific information has been gathered, consultation with the local Cricket Development Officer highlighted around 15 ‘nomadic’ teams have been identified – essentially pub teams that play informal fixtures across the season (usually around 8-10 games). These have been included as half team equivalents in the figures above given that they potentially do not play games at the same time within the season, and in many cases will organise fixtures between themselves on an ad hoc basis rather than weekly. As reported earlier, an attempt has been made to place a nominal figure on schools’ demand for cricket pitches. This is difficult to quantify and apportion to specific areas of the city. An attempt is made to quantify this in the figure below: Figure 7 - Estimation of additional cricket demand Type of demand Estimation of level

Schools demand

• Assumed that all schools with cricket facilities will generate at

least one match per week (2 team equivalents) – amounts to approximately 20 games per week

• Assumed that the 150 schools playing cricket generate 1 team – equivalent of around 75 games per week

Warwickshire Cricket Development

• Assumed that 10 team equivalents generate an average of 5

games per week

In total 109 pitches have been identified (includes those without community use). These in theory accommodate 286 games every week. Each pitch is therefore accommodating in the region of 2.6 games per week (the equivalent of 5.2 teams). The quality of facilities is therefore key to sustaining this level of use. Latent demand In addition there are a number of indications that latent demand exists across the city. Most notably the Birmingham Cricket League (BCL) has a waiting list and estimate that there is demand for at least another 20 teams. Supporting this, 17 of the 46 BCL clubs consulted identify a desire to grow but no capacity for any new members (they cannot develop additional teams because there is no room for them in the league). Additional fixtures cannot be accommodated across the existing pitches used. The Local Leagues organiser also reports stifled demand. The league is currently capped at 24 teams because of limited access to suitable facilities and a number of facilities outside of the city are currently being used. On the basis of these two indicators alone, there is potential for at least another 30 teams. In addition to this, feedback from clubs also suggests there is some suppressed demand. Over half (56%) of all clubs report ‘lack of appropriate facilities’ as a key issue for them. All of these clubs have plans to recruit more members. Four of the affiliated clubs also report issues with lack of facilities, and these are not contained with any one specific area of the city. The consultation has also highlighted some local issues with facility share arrangements and stifled demand at certain sites. The review of TGRs reported earlier also suggests that demand for cricket is lower than averages nationally. If these were to be brought up to the national average then this could generate an additional 90 junior teams and 70 adult teams. On the basis of the assessment and additional evidence collected, it is clear that current quantity of cricket pitches is at best adequate, but in reality is at capacity and showing clear signs of an inability to meet demand.



Club views Cricket clubs were also asked to rate the quality of the pitches they use. 72% of affiliated clubs responding rated their facilities as ‘excellent’ or ‘good’ compared to only 29% of clubs/teams overall. This contrasts with respondents from BCL teams, where only 3 of the 46 clubs responding hold positive views on pitch quality. Notably the majority of pitches rated negatively by clubs were in council ownership. More specifically they were in the main referring to Perry Hall Park as the main venue for the BCL. The fact that these facilities are not served by changing room or toilet facilities is a major issue.

Impact of quality on capacity If pitches are particularly poor then they may not be able to accommodate the number of games required to meet demand and this could increase any deficiency recorded or reduce surpluses. The analysis completed suggests that around 59% of pitches currently available could, given the high quality of some of them, accommodate up to 3 games per week. If the overall theoretical capacity of pitches (based purely on their quality rating) is considered alongside the assessment results, then the following observations can be made:

• The capacity of pitches across the stock currently available for community use is theoretically limited, but not significantly by some average and below average pitches. It is estimated that capacity equates to 230 games per week.

• This equates to a capacity of around 2.6 games per week (based on 230 games across 90 pitches). This is about the same as the estimated number required to meet overall demand for cricket in the city in some areas, although the above only takes account community accessible pitches.

Ancillary Facilities In terms of sites accommodating cricket pitches, 48 of the 71 sites with cricket pitches across the city are served by changing rooms. This includes the Civil Service Ground and Five Ways Old Edwardians, both located just outside of the city boundary. This overall picture improves when considering actual pitch numbers with community use. 2 out of 3 pitches are served by changing rooms (68%). However, despite the presence of changing rooms at a large proportion of sites, clubs report some quality issues. More than half of the clubs (heavily skewed by responses from BCL clubs) responding to the survey report access to no changing facilities, or use of provision they rate as ‘average’ or ‘poor’. As with pitch quality ratings, affiliated clubs with their own facilities rate ancillary facilities more positively. Pitch Access As with the football assessment, access has been considered from a number of perspectives. The findings include:

• 88% of clubs identify ‘internal funding’ as a key issue – that is many experience issues with running costs and balancing money in via subs etc with expenditure, including pitch hire charges.

• Information on the hire charges that clubs pay is limited. Many of the affiliated clubs own or lease their own ground, so hire/match fees are not relevant.

• Only 2 in 3 clubs have capacity for new members. As reported earlier, this is less than other sports and an indication that cricket supply (and subsequently demand) is potentially nearing capacity. At the same time as having no current capacity to take on new members, most of these clubs identify growth potential.

• A number of clubs identify facility needs to accommodate further growth – several clubs face a number of issues. These include restrictions of having only one pitch, and a need to refurbish changing rooms to meet the demands of additional teams, age group and gender specific sport.

The clubs consulted did not present an overall consensus on acceptable travel distances, or whether close proximity of facilities to local catchments was more important than high quality facilities. Acceptable distances for the majority of club members to travel to local facilities ranged from 2 mile through to 40 miles. This is potentially affected by the level of league play teams are engaged in, and the overarching vision for the club (i.e. playing at a high level, providing participatory opportunities for the local community, or both).



The average (mean) acceptable distance for participants to travel to access facilities reported by clubs is significant, at around 10 miles and most clubs report travelling at least this. Nearly two thirds of clubs (92%) prioritise access to high quality facilities that involve more travel than lower quality facilities within the proximity of where they draw their membership from. Put simply, a significant number of clubs prioritise quality over location. Other issues and challenges The collection of raw data and application of the PPM overlooks a number of key characteristics of supply and demand that need to be highlighted and considered within the assessment conclusions. These include:

• Two tiers of cricket provision – a number of private clubs, most with their own facilities on one level contrasting with the BCL which is made up of a large number of teams from inner city communities and a heavy reliance on public (council) facilities. This ‘two tier’ provision is typified by a difference in quality, with private facilities (generally) supporting high quality facilities and public facilities of a significantly lower standard (as a result of pitches located in public parks and open spaces).

• Supply is not necessarily in areas of highest demand – although the local areas assessments have picked up some issues in key localities, little demand in some areas is a direct result of a lack of facilities

• Cost of hire of private facilities – there may be capacity at some clubs with their own grounds who only run a limited number of teams that could be used by other clubs. But local league organisers report issues with the cost of hiring these facilities.

• School facilities with community use may not always be open or accessible during school holidays, a peak time for the cricket season – they may therefore not provide the most ideal solution for increasing supply. Cricket pitches on school sites which have converted natural wickets to artificial surfaces which potentially meets the school’s own needs but not the standards of local leagues.

• A relatively high number of multi-pitch sites without changing facilities – these include a number of the Council’s sites. Capacity, quality and usability would all be greatly enhanced with ancillary facilities.

• Several clubs with their own facilities have effectively outgrown their facilities – Handsworth CC and Handsworth Cavaliers provide a good example. Both clubs share the facilities at Handsworth Park, but both require more access to accommodate an increase in team numbers.

• There are some issues identified concerning imported demand and potential change of use of some pitches. In particular, Sutton Coldfield RFC have plans to convert the cricket pitch on their site, previously used by Four Oaks Saints CC into an additional rugby pitch. Selly Park CC, not included within the assessment (because they have been long established in the Solihull Borough) are losing access to their facilities at the Land Rover Sports and Social Club. They are currently looking for a new ground, potentially back in the city.

Summary of assessment findings: Cricket

The headlines:

1. On the basis of the assessment and additional evidence collected, it is clear that current quantity of cricket pitches is at best adequate, but in reality is at capacity and showing clear signs of an inability to meet demand. There are clear indicators of latent demand and capacity issues at a number of individual sites

2. Quality is deficient at around 40% of sites (based on ‘good’ rating). Pitch quality also varies significantly across local areas – while all pitches in Erdington are of a ‘good’ quality, less than 1 in 5 pitches in Perry Barr reach this standard

3. There is effectively a ‘two-tier’ cricket infrastructure in the city characterised by affiliated clubs with their own facilities (in the main) on one level, and BCL members and other teams reliant on Council provision.

4. The cricket infrastructure is viewed to be at capacity – although 2 in 3 clubs report theoretical capacity for new members, many clubs cannot plan to grow due to a lack of facilities

5. Cricket teams, particularly those not part of clubs with their own facilities are travelling considerable distances to play cricket



Rugby Union Local clubs In summary there are 16 local ‘clubs’ generating in the region of 118 teams in total. Team numbers generated by each club vary significantly, from single team clubs to those with in excess of 15 teams. These teams play in a number of different leagues across the week but predominantly across the weekend. School demand and team equivalents Estimates have been made for demand created by schools based on schools playing rugby as recorded by the RFU. Exact team information for all schools is not available so some assumptions have been made. In addition to school demand, an allowance has been made for demand generated by through training use, particularly for those clubs with floodlit pitches which accommodate both training and match use. University teams have also been factored in to the assessment. Pitch Supply A total of 66 rugby pitches have been identified, although not all are suitable or available for community use. This includes some pitches just outside of the city –specifically those at Kings Norton RFC, Five Ways Old Edwardians RFC and the Birmingham Civil Service Ground. Of these pitches, 58 (around 87%) are available for community use. Not all these are used by community teams, as they are not necessarily in the right place for local clubs to access. 9 pitches have been included which are outside of the city boundary (as bases for Birmingham Clubs).

Assessment results

A summary of the assessment results are provided overleaf. As with football and area based assessments for other sports, the temporal demand pattern (and peak demand period) for each area locally has been used). Specifically, in relation to Rugby the supply and demand assessment has used the Playing Pitch Model as a basis to model 5 different scenarios (as issued by the RFU). These are considered below with a focus on Scenario 5 which highlights specific issues relating to individual clubs. Scenario1 – All demand and All Supply The audit has identified a total of 66 pitches including the 9 outside of the city identified in the assessment table above. Total demand generated by clubs and schools is estimated to be equivalent to 150 adult team equivalents. This is based on some assumptions about the 31 schools known to be playing rugby identified by the RFU. Factoring in this demand, the overall number of games per week almost doubles (from just considering games played by the 16 local clubs) to 102 games on average per week. While most of this is accommodated during the week, additional wear and tear is placed on the available supply. The analysis completed indicate that even including additional demand generated by school and university teams, pitch provision is on the whole sufficient to cater for demand. However, the capacity of pitches is critical in some areas to meeting this. In the Hall Green, Hodge Hill and Yardley areas pitches need to cater for 2 or more games per week to service demand. This relies on pitches being of adequate quality to accommodate this. Scenario 2 – Matches and Training Capacity

This scenario takes account of all the floodlit pitches in use and includes training demands on these where applicable. Figures from the RFU have been used. This increases the overall demand for pitches to the equivalent of 131 games per week including the demand identified in Scenario 1. Training use of pitches, based on the estimates provided increases demand by around 29-30 games per week. Across the whole stock of pitches this increases the number of games per pitch to 1.8 games overall. This figures is much higher across several areas and increases significantly for those floodlit pitches which accommodate training and matches. As with Scenario 1, the additional use of pitches (much of which is



midweek) when factored in has little impact on the peak demand for pitches for club rugby over the weekend. But it does increase the use of pitches overall in terms of the number of games to be accommodated. Analysis completed indicates an increase in the required capacity of pitches across the 10 constituency areas required to meet demand. In 5 of the 10 areas, pitches on average need to accommodate more than 2 games per week to service demand. In Yardley, the two pitches available would need to accommodate an average of 4 games per week. This is unlikely to be achievable even where pitches are of exceptional quality Scenario 3 – All demand and Accessible Supply Only

This scenario takes account of the pitches in community use only (as summarised in the overall modelling) and the demand as identified in Scenario 2 above. In effect this scenario provides the ‘worst case’ scenario, by including all demand generated by community teams and team equivalents generated from training and school demand, and assessing this against available supply only.

Using just the accessible supply assessed against demand, there are a number of changes to surplus and deficiencies and the theoretical level of use that pitches have to accommodate. There are deficiencies in 6 of the 10 Constituency areas. The modest surplus in Sutton Coldfield is more or less made up of the pitches at Bishop Veseys School. While these are listed as being open to community use, they get used heavily by the school to accommodate the requirements of the school teams. The school run up to 15 teams, although most play off peak during the week. In 5 of the 10 constituency areas, pitches are required to accommodate the equivalent of at least 3 games per week.

Scenario 4 – Pitch quality and capacity The results of the quantitative assessment need to be considered alongside quality issues, as quality will affect the capacity of pitches to accommodate games. The quality audit suggests the quality of rugby pitches is generally high. 90% of pitches were rated as ‘good’ which in theory suggests capacity is not adversely affected. However, this is partly attributable to the presence of changing rooms at most sites (boosting scores by 15%) and partly down to timing of the audits. In the case of 23 pitches, the ratings suggest they are on the ‘boundary’ between ‘average’ and ‘poor’. A 2% reduction in their quality score would place all in the ‘average’ category. The analysis completed suggests the 58 pitches currently available could, given the high quality of some of them, be able to accommodate around 168 games per week. This compares to an estimated 132 games per week across the city. If the ‘good’ pitch stock was reduced by 23 pitches (the ‘marginal’ pitches, i.e. only just scoring high enough to be rated as ‘good’) then this capacity reduces to around 151 games in theory. Scenario 5 – Localised issues It is recognised that because rugby is focussed around key club sites, it is important to identify localised supply and demand issues relating to these. The audit has identified potentially ‘spare’ pitches in relation to those that do not currently accommodate community use. However, these are not of value to clubs if they are in the wrong away or ideally part of the club set up. The following table provided a summary of issues and challenges highlighted:



Figure 8 - Assessment Results – Rugby Union: Summary of Scenario 5

Club Total Supply Total Demand Comment

Aston Old Edwardians: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 2 pitches

6 teams / 6 training TE (including other teams) Total Games per week: 6 games Peak: 2 games Sat pm / 3 games equivalent midweek Also Rugby League / American FB and Cricket use of facilities off season

Enough provision – but very much at capacity, and site gets used all year round. Rugby League club also play at site. Pitches required to accommodate 3 games per week to meet demand.

Birmingham Barbarians: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 2 pitches

2 teams / 2 training TE Total Games per week: 2 games Peak: 1 game Sat pm / 1 game equivalent midweek Play at Moor Lane (BCU) - Site shared with other uses

Adequate in theory, but Club report issues with drainage on pitch.

Birmingham Civil Service: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ (assumed)

2 pitches

2 teams / 2 training TE Total Games per week: 2 games Peak: 1 game Sat pm / 1 game equivalent midweek Play currently at Landrover Sports Club in Solihull. Site is shared by other clubs. Capacity issues not known.

Currently settled playing out of the city at the Land Rover Sports Ground

Birmingham Exiles: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 2 pitches 3 teams / 2 training TE

Play at Civil Service Club – facilities shared by other clubs

Club play at Catherine de barnes lane. Site is subject to CPO for Birmingham Airport Extension. Club working on relocation to old Birmingham CS ground as part of relocation

Birmingham Wyvern: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 3 pitches

1 team / 2 training TE Club share facilities with Five Ways Old Edwardians – demand factored into that site analysis

Share facilities with Five Ways Old Edwardians

Bournville: Facilities rated as ‘Average’ 2 pitches

10.5 adult Teams and equivalents/ 4 training TE Total Games per week: 8 games Peak: 3 games Sun pm

Club have relocated to Bham Univ for all teams as the playing and changing facilities at Rowheath were inadequate for a sustainable development of the club.

Five Ways Old Edwardians: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 3 pitches

5.5 adult teams and equivalents / 4 training TE Plus 1 adult team and 2 training TE generated by Wyvern Total Games per week: 5 games Games at peak: 2 games Sun a.m / 3 games training MW

Facilities adequate to meet demand – key multi sport site also used for cricket




Harborne: Facilities rateds as ‘Good’ 4 pitches

3 teams / 2 training TE Total Games per week:3 games Peak: 2 games Sat pm Club have access to 2 pitches on the site

Since the relocation of Bournville RFC to Bham Univ the club have found sustainable recruitment and retention of players difficult. The club are actively seeking a new site either at Westhill Close with Westhill Trust.

Kings Norton: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 3 pitches

5.5 adult teams and equivalents / 4 training TE Total Games per week: 5 games Peak: 2 games Sat pm Site also used by Redditch Arrows American Football Club

Pitch facilities adequate to meet demand, but changing facilities need addressing to accommodate growth and female rugby. Club about to submit planning application. Project highlighted in RFU strategy

Lordswood Dixonians: Facilities rated as ‘Average’ 2 pitches

7.5 adult teams and equivalents / 4 training TE Total Games per week: 6 games Peak: 2 games Sat pm Club currently use 2 venues – Lordswood School and Moor Lane (BCU). Moor Lane also used by other clubs

Pitch at school is only ‘average’. Club is homeless and permanent base required. Significant priority. There may be potential for development of facilities as part of BSF Club also play at George Dixon school. Sandon road may have potential

Moseley Oak: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 5 pitches Club share with Moseley RFC at Billesley Common – demand has been

factored into this site analysis Billesley Common is a key multi pitch site with 3G provision

Moseley: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 5 pitches

19 adult teams and equivalents / 10 training TE Figures include Moseley Oak RFC demand Total Games per week: 15 games Peak: 7 games Sun am

Billeseley is the focus for rugby and the site has permission for a stand and changing which is key to the sustaining of a Championship Club in the city. The adjacent are very poor quality. There is a need for levelling and drainage of these pitches.

Old Griffonians: Facilities rated as ‘Average’ 1 pitch

2 teams / 2 training TE Total Games per week: 2 games Peak: 1 game Sat pm

Club rate the facilities they use positively and all needs met currently




Sutton Coldfield: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 3 pitches

15 adult teams and equivalents / 6 training TE Total games per week: 11 games Peak: 6 games Club has some additional provision for junior/mini rugby

Facilities only just adequate if factoring use of non-senior pitches. No access to floodlit pitch on site. Club planning to re-designate cricket pitch into additional rugby – potentially with floodlighting subject to planning

Woodrush: Facilities rated as ‘Good’ 3 pitches

7 adult teams and equivalents / 4 training TE Total games per week: 6 games Peak: 2 games Sun am Club own 2 pitches and lease a third.

Pitch supply is adequate, although club report some issues with drainage on one pitch. Changing rooms not segregated. Third pitch is leased partly due to poor drainage on one of the club’s pitches

Yardley and District: Facilities rated as ‘Average’ 3 pitches

9.5 adult teams and equivalents / 6 training TE Total games per week: 8 games Peak:4 games

Pitches only just adequate to meet demand, but are potentially used to capacity. If club house is moved site would be over capacity



In summary:

• Aston Old Edwardians RFC – although facilities are rated as ‘good’ they get heavy use by a range of other sports including Rugby League, Cricket and American football

• Potential drainage issues with the Rugby pitches at Moor Lane (BCU) used by Birmingham Barbarians RFC

• Potential support needed in relocating Birmingham Exiles RFC

• Issues with Rowheath Playing fields – the club has relocated to Bham Univ due to the inadequate facilities at rowheath. The club however remain committed to the development of 3 pitches on site serviced by changing rooms and clubroom along with a floodlit training venue

• Kings Norton RFC - Pitch facilities are adequate to meet demand, but changing facilities need addressing to accommodate growth and female rugby. Club about to submit planning application. Project highlighted in RFU strategy

• Lordswood Dixonians RFC – the pitch accessed at the school is only ‘average’. The club is homeless and a permanent base is required if it is to develop and grow. There may be potential for development of facilities as part of BSF. Other potential sites include George Dixon school and Sandon Road

• Billesley Common is a key multi pitch site with specialist 3G provision. The site also serves other sports. Billeseley is the focus for rugby and the site has permission for a stand and changing which is key to the sustaining of a Championship Club in the city. The adjacent are very poor quality The changing rooms are not currently adequate to meet all the needs placed on them. Although there are plans for 10 community changing rooms as part of Moseley RFC’s stadia development, these require funding

• At Sutton Coldfield facilities only just adequate if factoring in the use of non-senior pitches and is now regarded as over capacity. There is also no access to a floodlit pitch on site

• Woodrush RFC - Pitch supply is adequate, although club report some issues with drainage on one pitch. Changing rooms not segregated. Third pitch is leased partly due to poor drainage on one of the club’s pitches

• Harborne Since the relocation of Bournville RFC to Bham Univ the club have found sustainable recruitment and retention of players difficult. The club are actively seeking a new site either at Westhill Close with Westhill Trust.

Views of clubs Local clubs were also asked to rate the quality of the pitches they use. The club ratings differ from the perceptions of quality measured by the visual assessments. Whereas 90% of pitches were rated positively by the non-technical inspection, only half of clubs rate the facilities they use positively. Pitch Access As with the football assessment, access has been considered from a number of perspectives. The findings include: • 50% of clubs identify ‘internal funding’ as a key issue – this is significantly less than within other

sports and indicating that clubs are well run and managed • 81% of clubs have capacity for new members. This emphasises the importance of access to

appropriate facilities to accommodate this. • Over half of clubs identify facility needs to accommodate further growth – Bournville RFC and

Lordswood Dixonians RFC both have significant projections of growth but are constrained by their current facilities. several clubs face a number of issues.

The clubs consulted did not present an overall consensus on acceptable travel distances, or whether close



proximity of facilities to local catchments was more important than high quality facilities. Acceptable distances for the majority of club members to travel to local facilities ranged from 2 mile through to 15 miles. This is potentially affected by the level of league play teams are engaged in, and the overarching vision for the club (i.e. playing at a high level, providing participatory opportunities for the local community, or both). The average (mean) acceptable distance for participants to travel to access facilities reported by clubs is significant, at around 7.8 miles. Half the clubs prioritise access to high quality facilities that involve more travel than lower quality facilities within the proximity of where they draw their membership from. This reflects a balance between the need for quality facilities, but also a need to ensure these are close to current club locations. Other issues and challenges The collection of raw data and application of the PPM overlooks a number of key characteristics of supply and demand that need to be highlighted and considered within the assessment conclusions. These include:

• A serious issue here is that a number of rugby union sites are at capacity at the moment with just RU usage eg.. Aston Old Edwardians site is used by Birmingham Wyvern and Newman University, in addition to BCU teams and Aston University. Other examples are S Coldfield, Yardley, Moseley, Bournville on Rowheath where factoring in other sports usage presents significant problems to pitch maintenance and quality/capacity of sites. There is also some intensive use of some of the rugby facilities currently available. For example, Lordswood and Sheldon Heath Schools both support school and community use.

• A number of key sites just outside the City – need to be noted because if access is restricted or prevented to these in the future then there could be additional pressure on facilities within the city – e.g. Aston University facilities are used by the University teams, but also by Sutton Coldfield College. A further example is Birmingham Exiles affected by the proposed airport runway extension

• A number of key clubs are ‘homeless’ at the moment – this has implications for how they can develop and continue to accommodate new players as they are unable to develop a sustainable club structure. Harborne RFC, Bournville RFC, and Dixonians RFC are also located in high participation wards such as Edgbaston and Selly Oak

• Rugby Clubs are seen as key venues for the development of other sports such as cricket, football and rugby league as well as fitness. Adequate facilities are therefore needed not only to support rugby but to facilitate the development of other sports in the city

• There are a significant number of emerging rugby schools – around 50 schools where development work is taking place. Very few of these actually have rugby provision in place which will place additional demands on existing supply

Summary of assessment findings: Rugby The headlines:

1. There are sufficient numbers of rugby pitches in theory across the city, but isolated pockets of deficiency in some areas. Pitches need to be high quality and in the right place (in relation to clubs) to adequately service demand. When mid week sessions and community accessibility is considered then in order to increase the capacity sites better quality pitches or more pitches could be considered at Aston OE, Billesely Common, Sutton Coldfield, Yardley and District

2. Quality is relatively high although around half of clubs report some quality related issue with the facilities they access. Quality may be high because the sites are at capacity and the clubs have to maintain to a high standard to meet demand. Examples of issues should be Moseley pitch levels and changing rooms, Bournville changing rooms, Sutton Coldfield floodlit pitches

3. The key issue for rugby is the creation of a sustainable club environment to stimulate development and growth. There are a number of clubs that are ‘homeless’ in the city or in need of improved facilities to meet their needs. Specific clubs are Bournville, Harborne and Dixonian



Hockey Local clubs The audit identified 8 community hockey clubs and all three of the City’s Universities with clubs generating 82 teams in total. Clubs vary significantly in terms of their size and make up. Edgbaston Hockey Club currently operates over 20 teams. Other demand and team equivalents University teams are included within the community teams. Other demand and team equivalents include potential school use, and training time required by clubs. Although they play on University owned facilities, these pitches are also used by local community teams for matches and training. Additionally some allowance has been made of the use of AGPs by schools. There is limited schools competitive hockey and overall this has declined in recent years from central venues hockey competitions in six areas across the city, to just two (Small Heath Leisure Centre and Wyndley Leisure Centre). Supply A total of 20 Artificial Grass Pitches (AGPs) that are full sized and either water based, or sand dressed/filled and deemed suitable for hockey matches. Other facilities have been identified that are suitable for serving some training use and limited matches and not all are full size. The table below reflects those pitches within the city. As with demand, supply is not evenly distributed across the city. There are a number of other AGPs located just outside the city boundary that clubs also use. These are highlighted in the commentary below. There are a number of other AGPs across the city, which are sand filled or sand dressed and could in theory be used for Hockey. These include the facility at Fox Hollies Leisure Centre which although full size is promoted (and heavily used) for 5-a-side football. Other facilities listed on Active Places have also not been included in the above list. Holte Community School and Leisure Centre is currently undergoing a re-build, the facilities at Broadway Leisure Centre are in poor condition and not suitable for hockey at present. The list in the figure above very much represents the worst case scenario for hockey supply. In a number of areas there is no identified demand, and no corresponding supply. It is not known to what extent a lack of accessible supply locally (in the Hodge Hill and Northfield for example) stifles demand. Assessment results The following assessment table provides a summary of the assessment of supply and demand. This takes account of the teams and pitches identified in the tables above. Additional demand is accounted for in the commentary that follows. It is important to note that the assessment figures provide a theoretical figure for surplus and deficiency. Hockey clubs generally (given the lower number of clubs, their reliance on Synthetic facilities and the general distribution of these) catchments for clubs are likely to extend beyond single constituency areas. For the purposes of the assessment, it has been assumed that each STP can accommodate up to 4 back to back matches per weekend day. There are no specific restrictions on match times and fixtures are generally played between 1030 and 1730 (a 7 hour period).



Figure 9 - Assessment results: Hockey COMMUNITY TEAMS ONLY

Model Stage Results CITY WIDE

EDG

BA

STON

ERD

ING

TON

HA

LL GR

EEN

HO

DG

E HILL

LAD

YWO

OD

NO

RTH

FIELD

PERR

Y BA

RR

SELLY OA

K

SUTTO

N

CO

LDFIELD

YAR

DLEY

CURRENT ASSESSMENT Surplus / deficiency in pitches

All Hockey +11 +1 0 +2 0 +3 0 +4 -1 0 -1

FUTURE ASSESSMENT Surplus / deficiency in pitches

All Hockey +11 0 0 +2 0 +3 0 +4 -2 0 -1

QUALITY ASSESSMENT %of pitches rated as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’

AGPs for Hockey*

92% 100% N/A 100% N/A 100% N/A 100% 0% 100% N/A

Quantity: Main deficiencies are in Yardley where there is no suitable pitch, and Yardley HC has to play ‘out of area’. Deficiencies also recorded in Selly Oak attributable to Bournville HC playing ‘out of area’ at King Edward School facilities. Facilities only just adequate in Sutton Coldfield (although there are 3 pitches, only one has both community use and floodlighting) The audit has identified another 8 AGPs potentially capable of supporting hockey. These are not required from a community perspective on the basis of the modelling completed. Another indicator of surplus provision is the presence of non-city based clubs – Aldridge HC for example (Walsall) play in the city at Hamstead School. *Quality: Pitch ratings relate to those in use by clubs only. 10 sites and 12 pitches used within the city. Main quality issue relates to the pitch at Baverstock Sports College. This is in average condition. The surface of the Wyndley Leisure Centre STP was also rated as poor, but re-surfacing is about to commence.

Birmingham City Council Playing Pitch Strategy – Report


Factoring in other demand It is estimated that demand from schools and training use could generate in the region of another 186 games equivalents. However, this additional demand impacts less on the hockey modelling than for other sports. AGPs are designed to withstand significant use and providing there is adequate maintenance programmes in place, and surfaces are replaced in a timely fashion then capacity is not considered to be an issue. Latent demand No latent demand has been identified. All the clubs have capacity for new members. Club views Hockey clubs were also asked to rate the quality of the pitches they use. While most clubs rated the pitches they used positively, views on changing room facilities were generally negative. 6 of the 7 clubs commenting on facilities rated changing room facilities serving AGPs as ‘average’ at best. An issue was also raised about the quality of site management at Wyndley Leisure Centre.

Impact of quality on capacity Pitch quality of the pitches rated is not judged to impact on capacity. Nearly all sites were rated positively, and subject to appropriate maintenance regimes should be more than adequate to meet demand. The audit highlighted a number of facilities, and specifically some newly developed provision that is not floodlit. A lack of floodlighting may impact on capacity overall as pitches will be of limited use for club training or extended match day use. What is notable is that most clubs are having to access more than one (up to three venues for Harborne HC, Kings Heath HC and Sutton Coldfield HC). This is despite the presence of two double pitch sites. These sites though are in heavy demand and are used heavily by the University and King Edward School in addition to supporting several clubs. Ancillary Facilities In terms of sites accommodating AGPs pitches, all of the sites in use are served by changing rooms. However, despite the presence of changing rooms clubs report some quality issues. In some cases this is because changing rooms are out dated or more designed to serve the needs of school sport than community clubs. Pitch Access As with the football assessment, access has been considered from a number of perspectives. The findings include: • 71% of clubs identify ‘internal funding’ as a key issue – that is many experience issues with running costs and

balancing money in via subs etc with expenditure, including pitch hire charges – this could suggest hire fees are quite burdensome for a number of clubs

• Information on the hire charges that clubs pay is limited. Some clubs pay an annual fee for dedicated use in community hours, others pay a match fee – this ranges from £50 per match to nearly £100.

• All clubs have capacity for new members, but only 3 projects any growth. This suggests that demand for hockey is relatively stable.

The clubs consulted did not present an overall consensus on acceptable travel distances, or whether close proximity of facilities to local catchments was more important than high quality facilities. Acceptable distances for the majority of club members to travel to local facilities ranged from 2 mile through to 15 miles. The average 7 miles is less than for other sports where pitches are more plentiful and locally prominent. This finding could reflect an element of ‘choice’ of facilities i.e. there are other facilities that could be accessed, therefore increasing choice. Most clubs though expressed a preference for high quality facilities that require further travel than those that are closer but of a lesser standard. Other issues and challenges The collection of raw data and application of the PPM overlooks a number of key characteristics of supply and demand that need to be highlighted and considered within the assessment conclusions. These include:



• The use of AGPs for other sport, particularly during midweek evenings – the audit identified a number of pitches, potentially suitable for hockey which are dedicated for football use

Summary of assessment findings: Hockey The headlines:

1. On the basis of the assessment and additional evidence collected there appears to be a surplus of AGPs for hockey – however, there is a heavy reliance on a relatively small number of sites – in particular the water-based facilities at the University of Birmingham are in high demand. On the basis of this there may be potential to explore the change of use of some

2. Quality is sufficient providing pitches are managed and maintained appropriately, and that adequate resources are in place for the replacement of facilities

3. Although there are small numbers of clubs, several of these generate significant numbers of teams. As a result there are three clubs needing to access 3 different facilities to service the demand they generate

4. Growth in hockey, on the basis of local projections is projected to be relatively modest – only three clubs project growth. However, all of these clubs are currently making use of at least two different venues



Assessment and Analysis Summary – minor sports This section provides a commentary on the eight other pitch sports assessed, specifically; Rugby League, Lacrosse, American Football, Softball/Baseball, Kabaddi, Rounders, Gaelic Football and Outdoor Volleyball. Rugby League Supply and Demand Overview There is currently one dedicated Rugby League Club in the city. Birmingham Bulldogs ARLFC comprises 6 teams (4 junior and 2 senior teams) drawing their membership from across the West Midlands. They currently only cater for male participants. The club play summer season rugby, but also demand facilities during the off season (February to May) for training. In addition to the Bulldogs, the University of Birmingham currently runs 2 men’s teams. The audit did not identify any dedicated Rugby League pitches within the city. The University teams make use of Rugby Union facilities and the Bulldogs currently use the Rugby Union facilities at Aston Old Edwardians RUFC (based in the Erdington Constituency area). There are two rugby pitches here, one which is floodlit and onsite changing and parking facilities. The site is rated as ‘good’ in terms of both the quality of pitches and changing facilities. The changing facilities were undergoing some refurbishment works at the time of the assessment. Issues, challenges and priorities Although there is no overlap and direct conflict with Rugby Union, use of these pitches mean that there is effectively year round demand placed on the facilities. This could have implications for resting and regenerating the pitches at key intervals. Quality of the current pitches is high, but there will be a limit to how much additional use they can accommodate. The Aston Old Edwardians is also used for cricket – it is the home of Aston Old Edwardians Cricket Club. The cricket pitch outfield overlaps with one of the rugby pitches which effectively reduces the availability of rugby pitches for use by the Bulldogs to a single pitch during their summer season. This single pitch needs to support the demand generated by 6 teams. Effectively this equates to at least 3 games per week and is deemed to be at capacity. On some weeks the single pitch currently accommodates back to back fixtures (a game in the morning followed by an afternoon fixture). Birmingham Bulldogs ARLFC is planning significant growth in its membership and expansion to the number of teams operating in the next five years. There is already evidence of junior players within the club progressing to adult rugby. There is significant potential, given its wide catchment area for additional junior teams. The possibility of a 3rd Men’s team is also being explored. The Club’s overall aim is to participate in the National League. The club report, in light of the issues raised above that the facilities are not ideal, although significantly better than provision they have accessed in the past (mainly due to the presence of changing rooms, floodlighting and a ‘club atmosphere’). Clearly there are limitations to accommodating additional growth in participants and teams at the current facility. Should the club progress towards the National League then additional facility requirements and standards will need to be reached. American Football Supply and Demand Overview There is one community club, the Birmingham Bulls, operating in the area. Although they draw players from the Birmingham area, players join from the Tamworth area. American Football is also played at the University of Birmingham (under the auspices of the Birmingham Lions). In addition, Redditch Arrows share facilities with Kings Norton RUFC. The NGB also report potential for a team from Birmingham City University. The Bulls use a variety of venues to service their match day and training needs. These include facilities outside of the city at Walsall RUFC as well as those at The Pavilion (Moor Lane). The club has also made use of the facilities at Aston Old Edwardians RUFC, pitches that attract significant use by Rugby Union and Rugby League.



Issues, challenges and priorities The NGB identifies Birmingham as a particular focus for growth and development of the sport. The city is described as a ‘beacon site’ for development. A new strategy for the development and growth of the sport is being developed at the time of writing. Youth development, a growth in junior teams and development of the ‘tag’ game will all form part of this strategy. A number of challenges exist in delivering any future growth. The Bulls are currently a nomadic club, split across a number of sites. This does little to support retention and indeed, recruitment and players. A dedicated base for the sport in many cities is desperately needed if the sport is to grow and thrive in and around the city. Accessing suitable facilities is also a challenge. Although there are a number of precedents for American Football teams sharing with Rugby Union clubs (American Football is played in the summer) this does require some compromise on pitch facilities. The length of an American Football pitch is significantly longer than rugby and football pitches (at 120yrds) for example and pitches require significant marking (which can be obtrusive for sharing with other sports). Obviously American Football uses different posts to other sports. The size of the changing facilities is also a challenge. American football teams comprise squads of circa 40-50, each of whom will carry a lot of equipment. The NGB identify the following as ideal requirements to nurture and develop the sport in Birmingham: • A pitch to host games in the summer with suitable length, changing facilities, spectator

opportunities, bar facilities, a lecture room for team practice, weights room for strength and conditioning / ambulance parking near the pitch / first aid room.

• A pitch to train on through the winter (floodlit), 3G, ideally on the same site as match facilities accommodate other sports.

The NGB recognise that American Football pitch markings are intrusive on pitches that cater for other sports. There may though be some scope to develop some form of minimum permanent markings for fields (i.e. yardage hash marks down the middle of the field) without having the whole lot as permanent. Lacrosse Supply and Demand Overview There is currently only 1 club in the city. Birmingham Lacrosse Club has a playing membership of 50 and operates 2 teams (1 Men’s and 1 Ladies team). As with other ‘minority’ sports clubs, the club has a somewhat nomadic existence making use of a range of facilities within and outside of the city. Similar to other sports, there is a reliance on providers other than Birmingham City Council to provide for the sport. In addition to the community club, Lacrosse is played at the University of Birmingham. The University have 4 teams (2 Men’s and 2 Ladies teams) playing in BUCS matches on Wednesday afternoons. The club make use of 3 sites at present to accommodate matches and training requirements. As with other smaller sports assessed, this has a negative impact on club development and appears onerous for a relatively modest club membership. The Ladies team play their home games in North Womens Lacrosse Association games at Edgbaston High School for Girls. They also make use of the Synthetic Pitch on the school site for their training needs. The Men’s team play their fixtures at Birmingham University, and access provision outside the city at Warwickshire College (Henley-in Arden) for training. Issues, challenges and priorities

As with clubs from other smaller sports, Birmingham Lacrosse Club has had a nomadic existence. They have previously used facilities at Holders Lane, Moseley Ashfield Cricket Club, Harborne Cricket Club and Alexander Stadium. Beyond the pitches provided by the University of Birmingham and Edgbaston High School for Girls, the audit has not identified any additional lacrosse pitches. Quality of facilities, and lack of availability at the required times for games have forced the club to move venues on a frequent basis. The club have plans to grow their membership by at least 20 players. The Ladies section is hoping to run two teams but will not be able to accommodate these on the existing facilities at Edgbaston High School. Heavy usage of the pitch in the past has resulted in it being unplayable. The Men’s team report expensive hire fees associated with the facilities at the University.



Access to suitable synthetic turf facilities within the city is reported as a key issue as many suitable pitches prioritise hockey usage. The NGB reports that Birmingham has the potential (and should given its size and presence of University Lacrosse) for additional clubs and teams. However, essentially lacrosse cannot currently develop beyond modest growth due to a lack of suitable facilities. Softball and Baseball Supply and Demand Overview There are three clubs operating in the vicinity of Birmingham. Birmingham Maple Leafs, Birmingham Bobcats and Birmingham Bulldogs all draw a significant proportion of their membership from within the city. The NGB report that the sport is growing but there are limited facilities to accommodate this across the city. There are no permanent sand based facilities in the city. The audit identified some provision marked out on a temporary basis at two schools sites and across one or two parks and open spaces. Two of the clubs (Maple Leafs and Bulldogs) play at venues outside of the city. Birmingham Maple Leafs is identified by the NGB as the areas ‘key’ club. They currently play at Marston Green Recreation Ground in the Solihull Borough. This is a multi-sport site which includes cricket (some potential fixture conflict), and there are some quality issues (site only rated as ‘Average’ in terms of pitch quality rating) at the site. The club also has no access to social facilities which are viewed as an ideal requirement for creating a club atmosphere and helping with financial sustainability. The club is currently exploring some options to link with a school. Birmingham Bulldogs also play outside of the city at present. They previously accessed facilities at Dudley Kingswindford RUFC and are now resident at Old Halesonians Sports Club. They have access to good quality facilities by British Softball standards. Birmingham Bobcats currently make use of open space at Four Dwellings Park. This is the site of an informal football field and not a formal facility. There is no access to changing facilities. The club does not pay for use of the park and have no immediate plans to relocate. They are the only club playing within the city and currently have 2 teams. Both the Bulldogs and Bobcats play in the West Midlands Softball League. In addition to the three clubs already established, consultation with Erin-Go-Bragh Gaelic Athletic Association identified plans for a formation of a new softball team, potentially based at Holly Lane sports club in Erdington. Issues, challenges and priorities The presence of three clubs within the vicinity of the city (all relatively new) and the potential of an additional team at Erin-Go-Bragh GAA suggests a growth in the sport locally. Building on the presence of the three existing clubs, the NGB has identified the potential to develop a Corporate Softball League. Similar leagues exist already in both London and Manchester. Manchester already has 1 purpose built sand pitch to support this and a similar facility will be needed if a league is to be developed in Birmingham. The NGB reports that there is potential for a central venue league to operate in the city. This would need to be supported by a suitable venue to accommodate 3-4 games at a time which could also be used by existing clubs. Kabaddi Supply and Demand Overview There is currently one Kabaddi club, Birmingham Kabaddi club, based in the city with only 20-25 regular players. Most of these are drawn from the Hodge Hill areas around Bordesley Green and Washwood Heath. Kabaddi in Birmingham has experienced a significant decline in clubs and playing numbers over the last 10 years when a number of clubs existed across the city. There is currently no formal league structure or regular programme of fixtures across Birmingham and the club play ad-hoc fixtures and festival based games only. In addition to the club, the kabaddIAN project, funded by the sportunlimited programme is developing participation in the Hodge Hill area through a project engaging schools.



A key outcome target is the development of at least 3 local teams. There are no dedicated Kabaddi pitches in the city. Birmingham Kabaddi club make use of space in parks, including Ward End Park and Canon Hill Park and the KabaddIAN project is currently running a version of the game at indoor venues. Issues, challenges and priorities The club have aspirations to grow and be in a position to accommodate demand generated through the KabaddIAN project. The KabbaddIAN project itself has the capacity to grow and attract more participants. However, for the sport to develop a step closer to becoming more formal and sustained, facilities are needed. A starting point would be a basic 15m x 10m rectangular pitch for training and informal use. It is suggested that this could be easily accommodated on the site of disused bowling greens in Ward End Park. This could provide a training venue for the club, an outlet for the KabaddIAN projects Rounders Supply and Demand Overview There are no formal rounders clubs and currently no city wide structured rounders leagues operating in the city. However, the Birmingham Mixed Rounders Summer League (formed in 1993, but not affiliated to Rounders England) operates during the summer months from Holly Lane Sports Club (Erdington). Demand has been relatively static in last 5-10 years. There are usually 5-6 teams from the North Birmingham area playing. Rounders Pitches for use by the league are marked on the Football pitches. This presents some issues as the league cannot start until the football season is finished. Facilities are rated as adequate by the league and generally serve their purpose. In addition to this venue the audit has highlighted a significant number of schools, and some public sites with rounders provision marked out. Issues, challenges and priorities Rounders England have ambitious plans for the development of the sport nationally, and specifically in the Birmingham area. There are plans to create a number of strategic sites for rounders, branded as ‘Star Centres’ – this essentially comprises a community club vision and player pathway attached to Rugby Clubs and Schools. Rugby Clubs are viewed as ideal venues because they typically have a good range of social facilities, a track record in hiring and sharing facilities, existing links to schools and ample space to accommodate a number of summer rounders pitches. Currently across the country there are lots of informal teams playing rounders, but not many clubs. The Rounders Whole Sport Plan has a big focus on mass participation, and areas with high population densities, such as Birmingham are viewed as having significant potential. There are plans for a Rounders Development Officer in the Birmingham area (January 2011). The priority for rounders is to identify appropriate sites across the city and ensure joint working between Birmingham City Council Sport and Leisure officers, the NGB, individual rugby clubs, specific schools and the RFU to establish rounders as a higher participatory sport in Birmingham. Gaelic Football Supply and Demand Overview Five clubs have been identified - Erin-Go-Bragh, John Mitchells, St Brendans, St Chads, Sean McDermotts. These clubs generate in excess of 30 teams, catering for male, female, junior and senior Gaelic sports. There appears to be significant demand across Gaelic sports and clubs report growth. Despite this, facility provision within the city is modest. Only 3 pitches across the city have been identified. The Council provides one pitch, at Spring Lane. Although the pitch is good, there are no suitable changing facilities on the site.



Issues, challenges and priorities The key venue for Gaelic games in the city is Erin-go-Bragh (Holly Lane) which is the only club with their own facilities. These facilities are also used on an ad hoc basis by other clubs and Aston and Birmingham Universities. The club is planning to develop a girl’s softball team in 2011, partly to attract an additional income stream into the club. Currently most of the demand generated in and around Birmingham is accommodated at Warwickshire GAA’s own central venue at Pairc Na’haeireaan (in Solihull Borough). This is used by a number of clubs (specifically St Brendans, St Chads, and James Connelley GAA) for matches and training and creates significant pressure on these facilities. Sean McDermotts and John Mitchells do not have access to their own facilities. Fixtures are played across the week to accommodate demand, most pitches overplayed week in, week out. Some clubs would welcome more facilities in the city – e.g. John Mitchells draw membership from within Birmingham, would ‘jump at the chance’ to play in city. A priority is to further investigate the feasibility of establishing a base for Gaelic Sport within the city. This will need to be done in consultation with Warwickshire GAA and local clubs. Outdoor Volleyball Supply and Demand Overview Outdoor volleyball is formally recognised by Volleyball England, but currently there is no formal league structure or regular affiliated activity taking place in Birmingham. The audit did identify some evidence of unofficial tournaments in some parks (e.g. Ward End Park). Consultation with the Kabaddi club also revealed some involvement with organising volleyball tournaments in the past. Volleyfest, large scale Volleyball England run festivals have been run previously in the City Calthorpe Park 2009). No dedicated outdoor volleyball facilities were identified in the city through the audit. Issues, challenges and priorities Volleyball England, as part of its Whole Sport Plan is investing in grass court tournaments across the country as a means of increasing interest and participation. Alongside this it is developing its’ Club Equipment Franchise, which is being rolled out currently. This involves the provision of equipment to accredited clubs to run outdoor events. Outdoor Volleyball not dependent upon a network of permanent facilities and could be relatively easy to accommodate. Facility requirements are modest and settings flexible. Venues typically include local authority parks, rugby club playing fields and other open spaces. There is also the potential to look at use of surplus bowling greens for facilities. The priority moving forward is to work with the NGB and local clubs to identify potential priorities for Outdoor Volleyball development. It is suggested, due to evidence of existing interest and informal use, and the involvement of the Kabaddi club in organising tournaments, that the Hodge Hill area could be a pilot area.



Summary of key conclusions Major Sports

• Football: Severe quantity and quality short-falls across the city

• Cricket: Pockets of deficiencies in quantity and quality with provision reaching capacity. There is also effectively a ‘two-tier’ cricket infrastructure, broadly characterised by a network of private clubs owning their own facilities (generally of a high quality) contrasted with teams playing in the Birmingham Parks relying on access to public facilities (generally with quality issues)

• Rugby: Key issues relate to specific sites and clubs and access to appropriate ancillary facilities, some key clubs are “homeless”

• Hockey: No major facility issues but some local demand being accommodated ‘out of area’

Minor Sports • Many minor sports are marginalised in the city, with many teams moving outside of the city. Partly this is

because public facility provision focuses on the major sports, and in particular football and cricket. A priority moving forward is to engage formally with clubs and NGBs to explore action that could improve their presence in the city and be better placed to offer local sporting opportunities.



Policy Options Appraisal Any option to address the findings of the assessments and the priorities emerging from these is going to require significant investment and time to address. There is no quick fix, and any strategy needs to be phased and incremental. It needs to have partnership working at its core and adopt the ‘sweating the asset’ principle as a fundamental approach. Underpinning this is a need to be realistic about the current position (or baseline) and the ideal, and the amount of progress that can be made. The reality is that public sector funding is going to be reducing and not increasing – this means the context for delivery of a future strategy is focused on protecting existing provision and that new and improved facilities has to be realised through external funding (capital and revenue). This means the following: • Ensuring current facilities are used as effectively as possible with clear management, maintenance and

booking responsibilities • Delivery of improvements through partnership working with private, other public and voluntary sectors • Enabling leases and/or Community Asset Transfers to community sports hubs (multi-sport groups, collectives

and social enterprises) where there are clear sports participation benefits, with appropriate access rights for schools, leagues and other user groups

• Dedicated Officer enabling support An appraisal of a number of policy options has been completed to determine which broadly are most appropriate to address the assessment findings. Changing the use of existing pitches: ‘Re-designation’ This policy is most appropriate when there is a large surplus in provision for one sport, and deficiency in others, particularly in relation to winter sports. It is normally particularly relevant for football where junior and mini soccer provision is relatively easy to provide on existing adult pitches. It is less straight forward to re-designate surplus football into rugby. In addition to different pitch dimension and specifications, rugby is very much a club focussed game. Addressing any deficiencies in rugby provision for example must take into account the location of clubs, the location of existing demand and the subsequent usability of these pitches. It is also important to take consider the ownership of the current stock of pitches – from the Council’s perspective re-designation is ordinarily only viable across pitch stock in their direct control. The usefulness of this option needs to be considered in light of the overall assessment findings. In football in particular, there is in most areas a ‘net’ deficiency – that is, even with re-designation provision will still not be sufficient to meet demand There is little potential for this option to have a significant impact given the significant deficiencies in football facilities in most areas of the city. Partly this is as a result of peak demand for mini soccer mirroring that for adult football. It is also the case in Birmingham that many of the pitches available for local clubs are outside the direct control of the Council – re-designation is only possible for the pitch stock within their direct control. Dual-use facilities and greater use of education pitches This policy option is most appropriate when there is a large stock of high quality education facilities not in community use, and commitment from schools to open their facilities for wider use. In the case of Birmingham, only 57% of playing pitch sites across the Education stock is currently in secured community use. Not all these pitches are of a sufficient quality to meet the demands of community sport in addition to school use. For this policy to work there would need to be investment pitch quality, potentially increased maintenance and ancillary provision in some cases, as well as a commitment to the Extended Schools agenda. The remaining schools in the Building Schools for the Future programme are important here, but design as well as community use agreements covering pricing and access would be prerequisite. This option is more feasible and will have more impact in some areas than others. Opportunities to explore this option are included within the recommendations. However, this will rely on commitment from schools for secured community use that is managed appropriately. It will only provide an appropriate longer term option is there is significant investment in both pitch quality improvements and ancillary facilities. Implementation of this policy option will require changes to booking systems and



maintenance regimes. For football the option will need to be supported through a greater move towards and adoption of ‘packages’ created for community use (Charter Standard Clubs and links to the FA Club Links Programme. The option is more viable for multi-pitch sites (to ensure value for money) and if focussed on junior clubs/teams. Enhancing carrying capacity through improving the quality of pitches This option has most impact where there is generally poor provision across available stock, but the potential to improve provision at a number of key sites to increase capacity. The audit identified more than 1 in 3 sites and pitches accessible by the community where quality was lacking (pitches rated below the ‘good’ standard). There is therefore potential to target some investment at key sites to increase the overall capacity of key sites. This would need to be done in conjunction with other policy options and use of all pitches managed appropriately (i.e. not overplayed). This option should be explored and a number of priority sites are identified in the recommendations, with a focus on multi-pitch sites. The option needs to be considered alongside other options, particularly those involving potential changes to management and maintenance. There is a potential to develop community partnerships to maximise sustainability. Carrying capacity needs to be monitored as current multi-pitch sites are over used - any investment in improvements to quality need to be supported by sufficient maintenance packages. Changing the use of other existing recreational open space This option is most appropriate when there is a known surplus of provision across other types (typologies) of open space that could, at modest cost be brought into use as sports pitches. This option would need further exploration as assessments and strategies are developed for other open space typologies and other sports facilities (e.g. tennis and bowls). There is some surplus of Golf provision that could be explored further, and potential to explore surpluses in other open space typologies also. Bringing into play unmarked and disused facilities This option is relevant where there is existing land designated as playing pitch provision which is currently disused or unmarked and could address local deficiencies. The audit has identified a number of sites that were previously used for playing pitches. This option therefore has some potential to help address some of the findings. Some sites are public parks and open spaces and issues relate to the original specification for pitches developed. Sites where there is potential, or further exploration is required are highlighted in the area specific recommendations. Any site brought into use would need to meet the size and technical requirements of the appropriate NGB and supported by appropriate ancillary facilities. However, the ‘quality ceiling’ on public sites (given non-sporting and informal use) needs to be factored into decision making. As with other options, those sites with the potential to accommodate multiple pitches should be viewed as a priority. Management options, including Community Asset Transfer and long term leasing This option is most appropriate where there is a track record of this policy resulting in more effective investment and access to external funding, improvements in quality etc and where there is also adequate provision to service demand created by the emergence of new clubs / teams. The option is more attractive where there is a surplus or adequate provision in a local level, and less pressure on facilities. There is also an opportunity to transfer assts in different models and governance arrangements e.g. community sports hubs and community interest companies. There are already a number of models used across the Council’s current portfolio of pitches. For example, Glebe Farm Colts FC and Yardley RFC both have a management agreement in place in relation to specific pitch sites without a full transfer of asset.



Under certain arrangements, through a partnership model, assets can be made available to service several sports, clubs, teams and schools and enough flexibility can be built in to allow for other ad hoc casual hire, particularly if quality and carrying capacity is improved and specialist provision (e.g. AGPs) are installed. There is potential for this option to be explored further, dependent on the Council’s policy on priority use of pitches. In some areas, transferring assets to one club when there may be several clubs demanding additional facilities could have an overall negative impact. It is suggested that the option is piloted in more detail, and further research is needed to explore capacity and willingness of sports clubs, leagues and consortia of clubs to adopt this approach. Consultation suggests there are mixed views from local clubs and leagues. This option would require support (likely to be significant initially) from BCC Officers from a number of departments. Develop new facilities on new sites This option is generally a ‘last resort’ approach when all other options have been explored given the capital investment implications. It is only appropriate where there is a lack of provision overall and deficiencies across a number of sports which cannot be fully addressed by implementing the policy options outlined above. This option will need to be explored further depending on the outcomes of key decisions on future facility requirements for sports – this includes the greater potential use of AGPs for football for example. Overall this option is seen as a low priority due to budget constraints and the fundamental need to improve and maximise existing stock as first priority. Recommendations It is clear from the appraisal that there is no one policy option that will adequately address the assessment findings and issues and challenges emerging from these. The future strategy must therefore comprise of a range of solutions. General Strategy The general strategy for the city comprises the following priority themes. Underpinning them all is the need for investment. This is a given in relation to the assessment results where across the board there are deficiencies in quantity and quality. The Playing Pitch Strategy must:

1. Maximise the impact of current assets and be protective of what is current provision: For Birmingham City Council this means taking a more holistic and co-ordinated view of its existing pitch stock (across directorates, i.e. including Education pitches on schools but particularly unattached fields) and bringing into use facilities that do not currently have community use. It also means a more streamlined approach to management and operation of facilities

2. Be delivered in partnership: Linked to the above theme, it is important that the City Council works in partnership (ongoing) to address the assessment findings. There are a number of key partners and stakeholders involved in the development of, and provision of sports pitches. The recommendations need ‘buy in’ from both internal and external partners. Partnership working needs to be effective in minimising increases in maintenance and management costs, through design, co-location, community involvement, and Community Asset Transfer, (“community sport development led”) and community sports hubs (where suitable and completed in the enabling way). There needs to be recognition that the council does not simply divest of sites or its responsibilities to the community, but actually transfers time and expertise formerly used to manage sites to advising, training and supporting the “new providers” e.g. cricket grounds training for community members in the inner city, leading to skills and potentially employment.

3. Maximise current investment opportunities and adopt a prioritised process of site identification to guide the development of new provision that uses external funding where available : Despite the BSF programme being curtailed, investment in schools, and maximising the impact of this for community sport is still critical to a strategy moving forward. Additionally, ensuring Section 106 monies / community infrastructure levy and other investment through the planning process and local regeneration is targeted at the right types of provision in the right areas is important. It is unlikely, even through maximising the above practices that all shortfalls in quantity and quality will be met – developing new provision on new sites, given the extent of



growth in sports participation and population over the last 6 years and projected growth for the next 5 year is inevitable. However, this may mean adopting a more innovative approach and link to other facility strategies, including consideration to the move away from natural turf and the use of Synthetic Pitches for some sports

4. Link to the priorities and drivers of other strategies. The priorities of the developing sports specific strategies and acknowledgement that Team Generation Rates (the numbers of people required to generate enough demand for a sports team) in some city areas (particularly the inner city belt) are low (compared to city and national averages) need to be considered. There will be a role for wider partners, such as the CSPANs, in addressing some of the issues identified. A strategy for AGPs encompassing a hierarchy of provision being developed and this will need to address some of the Playing Pitch Assessment research findings.

5. Prioritise multi-pitch and multi-sport sites initially - It is widely accepted that it is more cost effective to invest in sites benefiting a number of sports and securing year round use. This could take the form of the community sports hub where a number of local organisations come together with the wider community to develop and manage provision. On a practical level there is the potential for shared maintenance costs across a number of stakeholders and different sports. The hub would then be supported in the enabling role by the council. This option needs incentives for clubs to come together.

6. Impact in the Short, Medium and Long Term: The assessment has looked at the current position and relatively short term changes in demand. The strategy needs to focus on addressing the issues highlighted, but be seen as a working document. Not all the shortfalls in provision will be addressed in a 5-year strategy; the journey from the current situation to ideal facility mix may not be achievable in any timescale and there may be issues in accessing NGB funding in particular which in some cases is determined and allocated in adherence to different timescales. Short term and interim solutions will be required to deal with the issues arising. This is most relevant when seeking to address deficiencies in changing provision in a realistic way. More temporary accommodation may be a short term solution and more cost effective on a larger scale.

Management of Information and resources Key issues were identified throughout the research process with the management of information relating to playing pitches, the ability to access this and the use of evidence in making investment decisions. There is currently no central (and up to date) database of pitch facilities and no formal means of keeping this up to date. The Playing Pitch Strategy Steering Group has been essential to sharing information, making decisions and informing the research, but its effectiveness was limited through poor attendance from key directorates. It is therefore recommended that: M1 The research outputs are used to create and maintain a central data base of all pitch facilities in the city,

their quantity, quality, use and site issues. All key stakeholders should have access to this to assist with the recommendations below.

M2 The research outputs are used to update the existing Supplementary Planning Document on planning

contributions and as a formal Section 106 funding strategy / Capital Funding Strategy (with consensus from Stakeholders) to ensure monies are identified in areas of most need. Currently Constituency Park Managers are consulted on available Section 106 monies and there is a difference in compensation depending on whether loss is playing field or public space. It is suggested that this needs to be consistent to avoid risks associated with sites becoming derelict and out of use to avoid higher rates of compensation. Currently Section 106 arising from bowls green losses goes into general open space funds and not recreational funds. It is recommended that this is changed. Moving forward Section 106 policies should allow for allocation within a given geographical or Constituency area and priorities should be identified via the Playing Pitch Working Group (see M7). Capital Funding Strategies should link where applicable to general regeneration plans and policies e.g. Area Based Plans. The provision levels required to meet future demand (including a 10% contingency) should be adopted as local standards of provision.

M3 Booking Systems and processes are reviewed and simplified to promote consistency for hirers and

equitable practices across the city (in relation to all Council provision). This could include testing the feasibility of a Central Booking System to encompass some school facilities also. Any bookings policy and process needs to be clearly publicised and accessible for all – this could include transferring the internal ownership of all playing pitch sites not physically located on a school campus to the leisure portfolio,



maintaining a policy of free schools use, creating a single centre for bookings, charging and allocation. A review of booking arrangements could also extent to consultation with local leagues regarding usage times. In particular this could encompass discussion around staggered kick off times at peak time on Sunday mornings to allow more games to be played and potentially more income to be realised. This will spread demand across non-peak times but will require pitches to be of a high quality to accommodate demand.

M4 Linking with M3 a review of pricing policy is conducted. Pricing needs to be linked to the quality and offer

of facilities. Consideration may need to be given to some prioritisation criteria for priority bookings based on criteria linked to sports development targets.

M5 Linked to the above recommendations, there is a need to review existing Council maintenance

specifications and provide a ‘service level guarantee’ to pitch users in terms of what level of service, grounds maintenance and overall quality of offer should be expected and who to contact with issues. This will need to consider reference to a commitment on repair work on an annual and less frequent basis. For some clubs an opportunity to pay more to improve the quality of the facilities used could be explored.

M6 Given the findings of the assessment, and severe shortages in football in particular, a formal policy on

Community Asset Transfer (CAT) and criteria for its use be developed. This will need to consider the suitability of a club who want to take on the responsibility, clear sports development benefits (i.e. it will enable the club to develop and offer/provide more opportunities) and there is a clear potential for site enhancement (or maintenance of current standards) and access to funding opportunities. It is suggested that CAT is more suitable in areas where there is adequate or surplus provision, i.e. the Council is not in a position to need to meet new demand. Leasing sites will reduce the stock it has to hire to teams. Other models of delivery e.g. community sports hub, community interest companies, CASC and social enterprises need considering to ensure any transfers support wider access and use and engagement.

M7 A Playing Pitch Working Group is maintained as a legacy of the Playing Pitch Strategy Steering Group to

keep the process ‘live’ and ensure a multi-sport approach to facility development. Monitoring progress and evaluating impact of delivery should be a key role, and this should involve regular consultation with pitch users. The Working Group should be extended to include the minor sports assessed and this engagement should be used to establish specific actions to address the issues and challenges highlighted in the assessment. A lead officer should be named to take overall responsibility for outputs and progress.

Given the findings of the assessment completed, and the likelihood that all issues are unlikely to be addressed fully, more though might be needed to how pitch facilities are provided for some sports. Early discussion and agreement on some more ‘radical’ developments will affect the implementation of the recommendations detailed below. It is therefore recommended that: M8 Some additional discussion is held around sanctioning local football league matches to be played on 3G

pitches should be considered. The FA is already investigating this with local league secretaries. The outcome and decisions around this will affect the direction of the strategy, particularly in relation to football facilities. Any move towards additional AGP facilities needs to be supported by appropriately resourced maintenance and replacement plans.

M9 Some discussion is held around creative options to better manage access to sites currently without

secured community use - this might include a team of ‘roaming’ facility co-ordinators to open/close school facilities at weekends

M10 Some discussion is held around acceptable standards of changing room provision – given the scale of

the deficiencies identified and the likely capital investment requirements, consideration should be given to more temporary accommodation i.e. ‘metal container’ style facilities. These are successfully used in other local authorities and might offer an interim solution for some sites.

M11 That the site specific opportunities be worked through with the NGBs for the key sports to identify a

priority list to secure focused action and external investment as soon as possible. This is underway and



a number of the specific recommendations below take this into account. Each project should have a named and responsible lead project officer to ensure delivery

M12 That opportunities for securing private sector investment from local and regional businesses and

sponsors be actively investigated with key partners e.g. health commissioners Artificial Grass Pitches (AGPs) A separate strategy for AGPs is being developed through the Sport England facility planning model. Area Priorities The priorities to address by area and by sport are detailed below with emerging recommendations and any further considerations. Priorities for investment are to be guided by the general principles and strategy identified earlier (including prioritisation of resources to improving current stock, in terms of management, capacity and quality and focussing on multi-pitch sites). A number of recommendations within individual areas refer to investigating access to (education) sites not currently used for community sport. In line with the general strategy agreed, these sites, where they represent single pitch sites with limited existing ancillary provision are not priorities for capital investment. However, they are priorities for action to reduce recorded deficiencies in provision across the 10 Constituency Areas. Edgbaston Area Football The modelling results indicate that quality is the key issue rather than quantity, although there is some need to re-dress the balance between junior and senior provision. There is also some indication that non-community demand is increasing in the area – the Planning team have been approached by both Newman University College and King Edwards Five Ways School about additional land for sports facility provision. There is the potential to do this by: E1 Ensuring facilities at George Dixon School and Four Dwellings School, both BSF are made available to

the community. It is assumed that 4 Dwellings will have at least 1 football pitch to mirror current provision, and the pitch stock at George Dixon will be improved. It is also assumed both sites will have quality changing provision to service community use as part of the BSF schemes. Shenley Court academy could be the site for improved changing, and AGP with community access (subject to the outcomes of the AGP strategy). Funding outside of the BSF budget will need to be secured to realise this.

E2 Quality improvements to Sennellys Park as the key public multi pitch site in the area – the site ideally

needs improved changing room provision. There is currently a large changing room block on the site which has received some recent investment but is not fit for purpose. Additional investment is required to bring facilities in line with Sport England and NGB design guidance. A feasibility study for the Park including the development of pitch and changing facilities has been commissioned, but funding will need to be identified to deliver recommendations. It is understood that Newman University College are interested in using the site also and helping to realise improvements to facilities there.

Cricket There is no significant quantity and quality related issues highlighted in the specific area. However, the following recommendations are made:



E3 Current levels of provision should be maintained where possible. Given that provision in Northfield and Selly Oak, the two adjacent areas, is only just adequate

E4 George Dixon International School is part of the BSF programme. The current cricket provision should

be retained as part of the school’s re-development and facilities providing community use supported. 1 RU pitch as part of BSF as this is the main home venue of Dixonians RFC

E5 Shenley Court Academy could include the provision of new square that could be available for community

use. This could be explored as a long term possibility but would require partnership working with Academy sponsors. The school facilities potentially available for community use (cricket facilities not currently used, but the school is open to community use) are already maximised – this may include use by clubs/teams outside of the constituency area.

E6 Ravenshurst Playing Fields has been used for cricket and rugby in the past and more recently

a scheme to reinstate cricket has been tabled. It is understood that the site is owned by the Oratory to whom representations should be made to investigate how to reinstate sports use should be made.

Rugby Although there is an oversupply of pitches in theory in the area, this is impacted upon by significant ‘other’ demand. A number of the pitches included in the assessment are on school sites with community use. These are not necessarily in the right place to meet club’s needed. Two clubs (Harborne and Lordswood) are located in and around the Edgbaston area. Both are effectively ‘homeless’ with regard to a long term sustainable venue. Harborne RFC currently play on University Pitches (sharing Harborne CC’s social facilities) and Lordswood Dixonians currently play at Lordswood School and Moor Lane. Constituency Consultation indicates that the Old Dixonians ground was formerly on the Ravenshurst Playing Fields owned by the Oratory and that this should be brought back into use if possible through discussions with the Oratory. Securing a home venue for both clubs is a key priority, specifically: E7 Progressing discussions with Persimmon/GVA Grimley and Birmingham City Council about development

of the City Road/Sandon road site to create home venue for Dixonians RFC at Sandon Road. It is understood that recently discussions have resumed and a planning application is likely to be submitted that could unlock developer contributions. Harborne RFC could be located at Westhill Close

General E8 A substantial amount of provision within the Edgbaston area is provided by the University, private clubs

and Schools outside the direct control of the Council. It is important to continue to develop and maintain partnerships to ensure good levels of community access. Clarification of the community use at several key sites also needs to be clarified. These include the Richmond Hill Sports Club (owned by Calthorpe Estates), where discussions between the Planning team and landowner are planned re: a strategy for the sports pitches. Contact should be made with the Oratory to progress usage of the Ravenshurst Playing Fields. These discussions need to take account of the findings of the assessment.

E9 Portland Road (Portland Centre) is a former secondary school landlocked site and most

recently being used as administrative purposes for the Birmingham CC’s Education Department. The playing fields have not been used for sport for over 10-15 years. The site would support a single adult pitch but has no changing provision. Single pitch sites are not the preferred model for sustainable operation.

There is a significant quality and quantity of pitches problem in the adjacent Ladywood constituency and given the specific site restraints, it has been accepted that if the site is disposed of, the capital receipt for the playing field land, be applied to contribute to either, a new artificial grass pitch at George Dixon School, subject to an effective community use



agreement where a need has been identified; or improvements to Portland Pavilion site; or improvements to Summerfield Park.

Priority site summary The priority sites for investment in Edgbaston are:

1. Sennelleys Park 2. Establishing a home venue for Dixonians RFC and Harborne RFC 3. Investing where appropriate in multi-pitch facilities on BSF sites

Erdington Area Football Quantity is the key issue in the area. There are severe deficiencies in the future assessment results in mini soccer and junior provision. There is also little spare capacity in the area, or facilities that are not in community use. Existing cricket clubs in the main and sites serving other sports are also generally providing for football (e.g. Hollyfields Sports Centre, Aston Old Edwardians) – these two sites in particular are heavily used for all year round sport. There is though the potential to: ER1 Actively encourage Erdington Court CC to encourage football use on their site – if this is feasible then it

would need to be managed so as not to compromise either sport. The sharing of facilities is not necessarily ideal, but could provide an additional income stream for the Cricket Club and extra football pitches which are served by changing rooms

ER2 Explore the reinstatement of football pitches at Yenton Playing Fields – currently only listed as

accommodating cricket which should be continued. There may be capacity issues, partly relating to quality at the site that would need to be rectified. It is important that cricket use is not affected.

ER3 As an interim measure, consideration may need to be given to using other recreational land for pitches.

A number of sites have been identified including:

• Bleak Hill Recreation Ground – potential for an adult pitch • Topcliffe Primary school – previously had a pitch marked out

Although none of these facilities would be ideal, they would ‘buy time’ to develop more sustainable solutions.

Even with these options, there will still be a deficiency in provision and it is suggested that additional sites will need to be identified. ER4 Quality improvements at sites where it was rated below ‘good’ are also a priority. In particular there is

scope to greatly improve the facilities at:

• Farnborough Road / Vale Stadium. The AGP is derelict and unusable. Given the size of the site, the presence of the stadium with changing facilities and the AGP the site could be a key facility for football. Section 106 monies are understood to be available to facilitate this

• Spring Lane – this is a key multi-pitch site, but the existing changing room provision is inadequate – these should be earmarked for replacement. There is a strong case here for a community asset transfer of the site to a community sports hub and the establishment of an Artificial Grass Pitch for training. Local security measures should be a strong feature of any building design here.

Cricket



There is a shortage of pitches in the area which is also one of the central areas of the city that generates teams playing in the BCL. All pitches in this area were rated as ‘good’, so quality is seen as less of a priority. There are no pitches identified not currently community accessible. It is recommended: ER5 Improvements are made to the Spring Lane site – this is a key multi-pitch site, but the existing changing

room provision is inadequate (this ties in with recommendations for addressing football requirements and would need to involve both NGBs)

ER6 That further thought is given to the establishment of the proposed cricket square Pype Hayes Park,

despite a deficiency in the area. The site visit suggests that development of a cricket pitch will require extensive earthworks to enable the construction of a square and suitable boundary since options appear to be limited. The development of cricket facilities on this site should be considered a medium term priority.

Rugby ER7 Given that the Aston OE site is at capacity with only 2 pitches and no ability increase capacity and

coupled with the facility and development investment going into that area by the RFU the growth of teams would result in capacity and quality issues at this site. Provision of additional pitches to cater for this demand should be considered potentially with the adjacent NBA

Priority site summary The priority sites for investment in Erdington are:

1. Farnborough Road 2. Spring Lane

Hall Green Area Football There are deficiencies in both quantity and quality. Quantity deficiencies equate to around 15 adult pitches (although this is spread across mini, junior and adult facilities). There is limited playing pitch stock not in community use – only a handful of Primary schools with limited provision. HG1 Montgomery Primary School and St Albans Primary have a mini pitch each with a junior pitch at

Swanshurst. These should be investigated for community use as a short term solution to addressing short falls.

HG2 Moseley Ashfield CC (Yardley Wood Ground) could be approached for potential to accommodate football

as well as cricket. HG3 Consideration may be needed to bring into use other sites not current used for pitches. Options could

include:

• Highbury Park – this is a large site previously used for pitches, with space for 2 adult pitches in theory. However, the site has a significant slope and quality would be limited

• Larches Green Open Space – potential for 2 mini pitches (unless the artificial cricket strip is removed).

• Reddings Lane Park – space for a mini or small junior pitch. These should be re-marked and goal posts erected as a matter of priority.

• Wake Green

Additional sites will need to be identified to meet demand. HG4 A number of sites require quality improvements. These include:



• Holders Lane – changing rooms need major improvement. It is understood that a masterplan has

been developed for the site which may also potentially include Rugby (Bournville RFC). It is understood that there are also discussions concerning a leasing of the site to Birmingham City University and the Kingsbridge. project The inclusion of Bournville RFC within proposals is subject to the outcomes of developments highlighted in SO6. It has also been suggested that the site could be ued a a centre of excellence for womens football. It is understood that at present there is no funding earmarked for the site. Recommend that this be considered for a new community sports hub.

• Queensbridge Playing Fields currently has one adult football and one small gaelic football pitch, in addition to cricket facilities. There are changing rooms on the site currently but these are of an old wooden design and ideally in need of replacement. Partial floodlighting also exists on the site, but it is not known if this works or whether some training use is accommodated at the site.

Some other 1 pitch sites in the area are in need of improvement, but the focus in the short and medium term should be on multi-pitch and multi-sport sites Cricket There is a theoretical surplus of pitches in the area. However, this does not necessarily take account of the critical mass of players within the BCL who reside in or around the area. However, given deficiencies elsewhere, and the willingness of the cricket community to travel (particularly the BCL), it is recommended that current levels of provision are maintained to potentially serve teams/clubs from outside, and that access to sites is developed as appropriate. HG5 A number of sites are recommended for quality improvements, including:

• Holders Lane – this is a key site for the BCL and should be considered a short term priority • Calthorpe Park – general pitch improvements needed and the site should be considered a short term

priority • Queensbridge Playing Fields – site is a longer term priority

Priority site summary The priority sites for investment in Hall Green are:

1. Holders Lane Playing Fields 2. Calthorpe Park 3. Queensbridge Playing Fields

Hodge Hill Area Football Overall there is a deficiency equating to around 10 adult pitches. There is some potential to bring into fuller use sites that are not fully utilised or have accommodated pitches previously. HH1 Explore options to bring into play facilities not accessible at the moment. Specifically:

• Waverley School – 2 adult pitches on site and it is also a BSF school. Proposals are for the school to relocated to a new site. these are to be replaced with I grass and 1 artificial grass Pitch. There is a need to make sure the benefits to both education and community are maximised

HH2 • Hodge Hill Girls and Boys School complex – 2 adult pitches, currently in good condition and

changing rooms on site (although part of the school) Negotiaions should take place with Park View school to ensure onging community use of pitches.



HH3 There are also 6 primary schools in the area with facilities not currently accessible to the community

providing a combination of mini and junior pitches. These could address some of the shortfall if brought into play in the short term:

• Brownmead Primary School (1 mini) • Hillstone Primary School (2x mini) • Heathlands Primary School (1 x mini) • Shirestone Community Primary School (1 mini) • Highfield Junior School (1 mini) • St Cuthberts Catholic Primary School (1 mini)

HH4 The MEB site (Green Lane) has the potential to add to the supply of both football and cricket facilities -

This a fairly compact site with one natural turf pitch, an overgrown cricket square with flikz artificial cricket wicket and synthetic carpet nets. There is no changing accommodation which should ideally be developed. Options for improvement should be explored (see HH7). This site has the potential to serve as a community sports hub.

Quality overall (in terms of % of pitches rated as good) is the best of all Constituency areas. However, there is still potential to improve this to ensure all pitches meet required standards. Cricket There is just adequate provision currently based on the modelling completed, but this is projected to be deficient (-1 pitch) in the future. The current modelling has been based on profiling demand (in particular existing BCL teams) across the venues in use and to take account of many teams attracting players from more than one Constituency area. This does not necessarily take account of the core areas of the city where teams draw their members from many of which reside within the Hodge Hill area. Offset against this there is the potential to provide a pitch as part of the long term development proposals from Heartlands Hospital Trust. This would be dependent on planning permissions, funding agreements and timeframe and the site may need to support some health related use also. More recently proposals for a cricket pitch / hub here have been brought forward by a group including Waverley School, with the support of Children, Families and Ypung Peole directorate and strategic sport.. It is recommended: HH5 Belchers Lane: The development of pitches resulting from the above development proposal or

independently should be progressed in partnership with the Wawrickshire Cricket Board and local schools potentially through a community sports hub and community use prioritised for use by the BCL. If possible this should be developed to a suitable quality to facilitate 3-4 games per week. This is an immediate priority for cricket.

HH6 That cricket provision at Waverley School be enhanced where appropriate as part of the BSF scheme

(which is proposed for a new site). This is potentially a key site for additional club use and there is potential for partnership funding. Development of provision is a short term priority.

HH7 MEB site (Green Lane) includes cricket in proposals for development. It is recommended that a planned

sequence of remedial work is undertaken on the cricket square as soon as possible to bring the facility back into a usable state. Existing leaseholders have left the square in an unplayable condition, so moving forward appropriate management and maintenance responsibilities will need to be established. Transfer to a community sports hub could enable external funding applications for changing provision. BCL should be a core partner in any transfer. This is a short term priority for the ECB.

Rugby Yardley and District RFC have their club base in Hodge Hill, and there is projected to be a future deficiency of pitches in the area. As the club generate the demand in the area, any increase in pitch provision should be linked to the club. The draft Core Strategy for the former Yardley Sewage Works site where the club is located proposes that the site is developed for housing. In this case the club would have an aspiration to relocate (and improve) their clubhouse and changing rooms across Cole Hall Lane to where their pitches are located. It is therefore recommended that:



HH8 To inform Core Strategy proposals that a detailed technical survey is undertaken on the land surrounding

the current Clubhouse – this may be contaminated but a technical survey is required to establish if the site can be developed for pitches. The site, if possible to develop, would provide potential for a number of additional pitches. The club may prefer to relocate across to Cole Hall Lane if the site is developed for housing.. This needs further investigation and support from Birmingham City Council.

Kabaddi Kabaddi has the potential to be developed further in the area. It is therefore recommended that: HH9 A rectangular 15m x 10m pitch is marked out in Ward End Park for use by the KabaddIAN project and

Birmingham Kabaddi Club. It is understood that this could be achieved within existing resources. Priority site summary The priority sites for investment in the Hodge Hill area are:

1. MEB site (Green Lane) 2. Belchers Lane 3. Waverley School 4. Yardley and District RFC

Ladywood Area Football A key issue in this area is the level of potential growth in demand that could result from the projected population increases. This could, if not planned for, lead to severe quantitative deficiency equating to around 17 adult pitches (future). The area also has the worst quality when reviewing how many of the currently accessible pitches are rated as ‘good’ or above. Overall there is very little provision not already in community use. Most facilities identified are primary schools with limited provision. These, even if brought into use will not form an effective solution to the deficiencies recorded. With this in mind more innovative options will need to be explored – these will need to link with AGP strategy and greater use of 3G provision. A key issue is the lack of a good quality, publicly accessible multi-pitch sports ground. Multi-pitch sites in the area are either out of public ownership or are part of wider parks sites (e.g. Aston Park). However: L1 Community use at the following schools should be investigated as they may meet some of the deficiency,

particularly in Junior pitches in the short term:

• Nelson Primary School (1 junior pitch) • Manor Park Primary (1 junior pitch) • James Watt Junior (1 junior pitch) • St Chads Primary School (1 Junior and 2 mini pitches) • Aston Tower Community School (1 junior pitch) • Holy Trinity Catholic School (1 adult pitch)

Selwyn Road Playing Fields is also understood to support some education use. This was not formally marked at the time of the audit but may have potential for community use. Nelson School; consideration should be given to the main playing field being given over to an AGP to maximise community use, given the lack of facilities to participate in football or other outdoor sport. The adjacent public open space may benefit from being brought into the school ownership if Birmingham’s 50m pool is not to proceed.



L2 The audit also identified the potential for a mini soccer pitch on the raised part of the Portland Sports site.

Given its multi-sport focus already, the location of a section of a junior football club there (also potential scope for mini soccer on the cricket outfield) could be explored.

L3 In addition a number of schools currently have no formal marked provision, but the potential space to

provide pitches. Use of the these sites should be investigated. Specifically:

• Foundry Primary School has room for a junior football pitch (and previously had one marked). • Mathew Boulton Primary School has the potential for a junior pitch

L4 Other sites in the area also have potential and this will need to be explored in more detail. Hockley Port (a

leisure freehold site) has previously been used for a pitch – it has an old changing room block and evidence of being floodlit previously. This site has previously been declared as ‘surplus’. Although the site has restrictions it might serve as a 2 mini pitch site for a local club. Handsworth FC has expressed an interest in the use of this which should be explored.

L5 Seek to secure community access to provision being planned at Holte and Broadway Learning Centres

and ensure there is secured community use Agreement. It is understood that a potential pitch may be provided as part of the new school

Quality improvements are also a priority in the Ladywood Area. As in Erdington, the potential solutions are not easily arrived at and the key priority is to address quantity issues. The audit has identified a number of informal recreation sites in the area (e.g. The Crescent/Park Road in Hockley, Garrison Lane Park, and Winson Street) where some previous playing pitches have been accommodated. These sites may offer some potential as part of short term solutions and could be explored further for their suitability. There is also some former (although disused and overgrown) provision at the Holloway Head site (former facilities serving St Thomas Primary School). The footprint of the site is restricted but some potential has been identified for development (e.g. it already has lighting infrastructure in place) of an artificial grass pitch that could also be used for higher standard football . This would need to be explored further. As a number of clubs are ooking for a suitable facility to match facility requirements at the level they play. L6 It is recommended that a technical feasibility study is carried out to explore the potential of this site for

future sports development Cricket There is a significant deficiency in provision currently which is project to increase significantly. This is due to significant population increase and many of the Local League, Streets to Arena and BCL cricket teams generated from the local population. George Dixon school has a new wicket and community access should be encouraged. Addressing quantitative deficiencies is not likely to be possible without the development of new provision at currently non-cricket sites. Recommendations are: L7 Investigate further community use potential at King Edward School Aston Sports Ground (1 pitch,

currently used by Aston Cricket Club. This is a short term priority. L8 Investigate cricket provision at existing sites where only winter sports are catered for. Specifically this

could include the M&B Sports Ground, an enclosed site currently only used for football. BCL have expressed an interest in using the site if it could be made available and a number of stakeholders have identified potential for further S106 monies

Priority site summary



The priority sites for investment in the Ladywood area are:

1. New sites, particularly consideration to the use of AGPs as appropriate in line with the AGP strategy 2. M&B Sports Ground

Northfield Area Football The Northfield area has a severe net deficiency of football pitches – equating to around 33-34 adult pitches currently and potentially rising to 38 pitches in the future (this is based on modest growth projections). N1 Improve the quality and use of Cofton Park – this is currently underused but could be a key site for

football and cricket. Changing rooms are a priority, but there is potential for 5 football and 3 cricket pitches at this site. This is a high priority.

N2 The Hayes (Education asset) may have potential to be developed for greater football use. It currently

has no football facilities marked and at the time of the audit had a rugby pitch (not needed on the basis of the assessment completed) in place together with markings for athletics. Although there are previous reports of poor drainage, this was not evident at the time of the site visit. However, a full site investigation together with soil analysis (it is understood that the site is on clay soil) should be undertaken in order to determine the full potential of the site, design the best pitch layout (the site could potentially accommodate 6 adult pitches) and inform drainage design. An architect should also be commissioned to determine the location of the pavilion and supporting services. This site was identified by the local FA as a potential site for Santiego Colts (more than 15 teams) but they have now secured a site in Bromsgrove.. Should be considerd alongside any proposals for the Wast Hills site (N5) High priority.

N3 Some provision on school sites not currently available for community use should be investigated for its

potential use. Specifically:

• Turves Green Boys School (2 junior pitches) • Green Meadow Primary School (1 mini) • Cofton Primary School (1 mini) • Cadbury 6th Form College (1 adult pitch)

A number of these sites would require quality improvements to facilitate community use. Not all are served by changing room facilities. Quality is generally low across the area with less than half of the pitches rated as ‘good’ or above.

N4 Kings Norton Playing Fields – this is a multi pitch site currently with some porta-cabin style changing

rooms. However, the capacity of these is limited in relation to the potential use of the site. This should be improved where practicable to provide a multi-pitch site and improve its usability. This is a High priority.

N5 Wast Hills Playing Fields – this site is University of Birmingham owned and leased to Birmingham City FC

as their training facility. It is recommended that more investigation of this sites usage and potential for some community use be carried out. The site accommodates up to 9 pitches and it is not clear if all of these are needed. Consideration could be given to establishing Harborne RFC on this site. This site is not a priority for investment, but greater access should be investigated. This site should be considered alongside the adjacent Hayes site (N2) as is could be considered in a long temr masterplan involving the key players in the two sites.

N6 Consider bringing into formal use a number of recreation grounds and formerly used playing pitches –

these will have quality limitations but include:

• West Heath Park – potential for at least 2 adult pitches • Walkers Heath Recreation Ground – potential room for 3-4 adult pitches • St James Catholic Primary School – room for 1 junior pitch • Space for mini soccer at Hawkesley Primary School, Albert Bradbear Junior School, and St Paul’s

Catholic Primary School



• Victoria Common, has lost facilities in recent years e.g. football changing rooms. Cricket The assessment results suggest that cricket provision is adequate, currently, and in the future to accommodate community demand. This is not a key focus area for the BCL. However, it is important that quality is enhanced. (only 1 in 3 pitches rated as ‘good’). Recommendations: N7 To improve the use of Cofton Park – the site has the potential to provide additional football and cricket

provision to that already provided. This is a long term priority for the ECB as the site is out of the core catchment for the BCL.

Priority site summary The priority sites for investment in the Northfield area are:

1. Cofton Park 2. The Hayes 3. Kings Norton Playing Fields 4. Victoria Common

Perry Barr Area Football Currently provision is just about adequate, in terms of overall pitch stock available and current demand. This is projected to worsen in the future, with an anticipated deficiency equivalent to 2 adult pitches. Quality is deficient across some sites and only half of all mini and 1 in 3 adult pitches are rated as ‘good’ or better. The main issue is a lack of changing provision to serve key multi pitch sites. Perry Hall Park, Aldridge Road, Holford Drive and Burford Road are all multi-pitch sites without changing rooms. To address deficiencies it is recommended: PB1 Secure investment in Holford Drive for pitch improvement and changing/pavilion through a community

asset transfer or community interest company to a community sports hub. Part of the site has been sold and part of the receipt (understood to be £1.2m) has been allocated for community sport improvements to the site. The latest plans for the site suggest only 1 pitch will be lost. Continental Star FC are amongst several clubs that have expressed an interest. Proposals for the Hub are well developed and other sports as well as football and cricket include tennis and boxing. If the pitches are also required for off site education use then appropriate investment in quality and capacity works and a carefully planned management plan will be required.

PB2 Perry Hall Park, where the playing pitches are of a reasonable quality, is viewed as a priority for changing

room provision – it is suggested that metal containers/ modular changing be investigated as a short term solution. This is required to address deficiencies in cricket predominantly, but would increase the number of pitches served by changing rooms in the area.

PB3 Hill top is a playing field site, potentially providing 3 adult pitches. With some investment and it could be

a high quality site, but only if existing drainage issues are resolved. The pitches are located next to a golf course. Parking facilities and overall security is good in terms of vehicular access and there is potential for changing facilities to be accommodated as part of the golf complex where services already exist. If stand alone facilities are considered, designs would need to be ‘robust’ as there is some history of arson attacks at the site.

PB4 There is proposed provision coming on stream Victoria Jubilee (potentially 1-2 pitches). New pitches

including an AGP, have been developed at the Ansells Sports Ground (BCU) next door to Holford drive. These need to be secured for community use if possible.



PB5 Improvements to Burford Road and Aldridge Road Playing Fields should be considered. Cricket There is currently a small theoretical surplus in provision which is adequate in theory to meet future growth. However, this does not take account of the desire of some teams (and the BCL) who play outside the area to play within Perry Barr. The theoretical surplus is partly due to the sheer number of pitches provided at Perry Hall Park, but schools with community use and cricket facilities on site also contribute to this. The pitches at Parry Hall Park are of a reasonable quality, but a lack of changing facilities affects the ability to maximise this site. More pitches are required to cater for the latent demand reported by the BCL and quality across the area is lacking. Recommendations are: PB5 Clarify plans for Holford Drive with planning gain/Section 106 monies prioritised for at least maintaining

the level of provision locally. The ECB will need to work with FA and the Council to ensure this happens. PB6 Invest in changing room provision at Perry Hall Park – more cricket takes place at this venues than any

where else in the city. Consider short term solutions for toilet provision and expanding the number of pitches at the site (potential for another 3 squares). This is the highest priority action for Cricket. However, it is understood that previous plans to increase the number of squares has met resistance. Any proposals will need to be consulted upon with consideration given to the other recreational uses on site.

PB7 To ensure cricket remains in the plans for the Victoria Jubilee development – this is seen as a key venue

for local clubs to develop (in particular Handsworth CC) Priority site summary The priority sites for investment in the Perry Barr area are:

1. Holford Drive 2. Perry Hall Park 3. Aldridge Road Playing Fields 4. Burford Road Playing Fields

Selly Oak Area Football The modelling completed suggests there is generally adequate provision in terms of quantity, but quality is an issue (particularly in relation to Junior and Adult provision). Future modelling suggests a shortage of 1 junior pitch offset by a small surplus of adult pitches. This needs to be considered in light of low TGRs for adult football (potential latent demand) and acute shortages in Northfield (neighbouring area). Recommendations include: SO1 The former Pebble Mill playing fields on this site have recently received permission for use as a centre of

excellence for hockey . eg Consent granted July 2011 for all-weather hockey pitch with floodlights and new clubhouse. Use shared between King Edwards School (KES), other schools, and hockey clubs. The remaining pitch is currently used by KES for rugby practice but could be enhanced to include more community use.

SO2 Prioritising improvements and changing facilities to serve pitches at Yardley Wood Playing fields – this is a key 4 pitch site for football. Pitch facilities are of an average quality, but the site would be enhanced through changing facilities. Funding would need to be secured. Rowheath (see SO6 could also be used to cater for football.



Cricket There is currently a small surplus in provision, but this is projected to be required to meet future demand. It is recommended that: SO3 Confirmation is sought on the future use of the Selly Oak Hospital pitch site. No current use of this site

was identified but the pitch is a priority for protection and maximising use given the assessment findings. A new cricket pavilion and net provision should be secured for community use here.

SO4 Some investigation is made into the costs of improving facilities at Billesley Common. The cricket pitches

are generally in average condition (but rated poorly by some users), and a more technical appraisal identified extensive weed infestation in some areas. In order to improve the quality of facilities it would be necessary to undertake extensive earthworks creating level playing areas. In order to assess the practicality of this, a detailed levels and dimensional survey should be undertaken together with a ground modelling calculation to provide an accurate development plan together with budget costings. The improvement of the levels would provide higher quality facilities and additional funding could then be sought to install drainage and to construct proper cricket squares. It may be necessary to phase the work if this is practical so that the entire field is not taken out of use at one time. This is a high priority (short term action) for Cricket and will involve collaboration with the RFU and FA.

Rugby There is projected to be a deficiency in rugby facilities in the Selly Oak area to cater for current and future demand. The area is a ‘hotspot’ for the sport with a number of clubs based in the area. Specific recommendations are: SO5 Prioritise improvements to Billesley Common as it hosts the city’s highest level performance club which

has planning permission to develop the stadia in line with league recommendations at professional level. In relation to community pitches for cricket and rugby union levelling and drainage are key to the sustainable use of those pitches given the site is already at capacity and caters for male and female sport this should be in accordance with a Masterplan that should be developed for the site to provide guidance on a more efficient pitch configuration(see cricket above) Additional funding is required to progress the community changing room proposals put forward as part of the Moseley Rugby Stadium development.

SO6 Clarification should be sought around the potential for improvements to the Rowheath Playing Field site,

in particular the pavilion. Improvements are required to enable Bournville RFC to further develop and meet demand. Developing their base at the site is the Club’s preferred option.

SO7 Further exploration of the use of the former Midland Bank Sports Site for use by Bournville RFC (subject

to the outcome of SO6) - the club have been approached about this site by KES/Calthorpe as a rugby/hockey site. It is judged to be a good location and ideal for sustainable club/school venue. The site audit identifies a fairly small field which presently accommodates one rugby pitch, but with potential for a smaller second pitch. There is good vehicular access and parking. There is no changing on site although it appears that there may have been at one time. Re-instatement of this is critical to development of the site as a club ground. Further discussions should be held with the various parties and consideration given to the installation of a drainage scheme. This would require a full pitch survey and the taking of soil samples.

Hockey The deficiency recorded in pitches is a result of Bournville HC playing ‘out of area’ using facilities at King Edward High School for Girls as well as pitches operated by the University of Birmingham. The club rate the pitch facilities as ‘excellent’. No specific recommendation is required, providing access is maintained for community hockey at the school and University. Priority site summary The priority sites for investment in the Selly Oak area are:



1. Pebble Mill site 2. Billesley Common 3. Yardley Wood Playing Fields

Sutton Coldfield Area Football Currently there is a deficiency in provision equating to around 17 adult pitches. This is not projected to increase in the future due to no projected growth in population in this area and modest growth rates. The area, in terms of demand has potentially peaked – Sutton Coldfield has among the highest football TGRs in the city. Quality is lacking across the stock of mini and junior pitches also. In relation to addressing quantitative deficiencies, there are no multi-pitch sites without secured community use within the area. SC1 There are 14 schools with facilities, without community use. These could be investigated. In particular:

• The Arthur Terry School – 1 adult pitch. Community use is being finalised for the use of the new STP, this could potentially be extended to include the football pitch

• Deanery Church of England primary – 1 adult and 1 mini pitch. SC2 Prioritise improvements to the quality of Rectory Park – specifically changing room provision should be a

priority. The site accommodates a range of junior and senior football and is currently used by around 8 different clubs. The site has the potential for 6-7 pitches. At the time of the audit only three were marked. Maximising the quantity and quality of this site is a priority to help address deficiencies. Some potential funding for improvements has been secured and this should be allocated on the basis of a multi-sport masterplan for the site which should be developed.

SC3 Prioritise improvements to the quality of Breamar Road playing fields. The site is used by at least three

different clubs. Pitches are rated as below average and are evidently heavily used. Changing room facilities at the site are poor – there is no access to showers. Funding would need to be found to deliver improvements.

SC4 Prioritise improvements to the quality of Wishaw Lane. It is understood that there is in the region of

£100k from S106 monies to help realise this. Given its proximity to the Erdington area and the shortfalls recorded in the area assessment, this site should be a priority for investment. The site accommodates a number of adult and junior facilities currently. The Pitches on the site are rated as ‘good’ overall, but it is understood there are some issues with drainage and there are no changing rooms to serve the site. Section 106 monies have been secured for improving the site.

Investment and improvement to these sites would create a network of multi pitch sites at strategic locations across the Constituency area.

Cricket Cricket provision is adequate in terms of the number of pitches. Quality is also high with 11 of the 12 pitches identified rated as ‘good’. No specific recommendations are made, but the current provision needs to be maintained. Hockey Provision is only just adequate to service demand, and Wyndley Leisure Centre is the only venue with both community use and floodlighting. The pitch is currently being re-surfaced. Current club demand is accommodated a long way outside the area and needs to be accommodated more locally. Future growth, if significantly above levels estimated will require access to additional provision. More pitches of a better quality were clearly needed if hockey was to continue to be played at the highest level in the constituency. This



may need to include the exploration of floodlighting at other local provision (e.g. Bishops Vesey School.) There may be planning restrictions to these proposals. Rugby SC5 Sutton Coldfield RFC has been defined as at capacity and is located in a high participation ward. There is

a need here for one additional pitch on site and development of training floodlights Priority site summary The priority sites for investment in the Sutton Coldfield area are:

1. Rectory Park 2. Wishaw Lane 3. Breamer Road 4. Additional access for hockey 5. Rugby provision for Sutton Coldfield RFC

Yardley Area Football There are deficiencies in provision in Yardley. These equate to around 5-6 adult pitches. Currently there are no dedicated mini pitches to meet demand and a shortage in junior football. This is offset by a surplus in adult facilities. Quality is generally poor – only 1 in 5 pitches are rated as ‘good’. Access to changing rooms is a key concern in the area also. Recommendations are: Y1 To improve facilities at Oaklands Recreation Ground. This is a multi-pitch site (potentially 5 adult

pitches), not currently served by changing rooms. Pitches are currently rated as average. There is £3m of Section 106 monies dedicated to sport, recreation and play on a phased basis (linked to a Tesco development) to invest in this site. It is understood there has been some use of a nearby community centre (on Holder Road) in the past and enhancement of this could be considered. Options for the site need to be explored in more detail. The site has previously accommodated other sports.

Y2 To investigate community use at Cockshutt Technology College – there are two pitches on this site (1

adult and mini) together with good quality changing room facilities Y3 To investigate community use at:

• Stanville Primary School (1 mini pitch) • Stechford Primary School (1 junior pitch) • Mappledene Primary School (1 mini pitch) • Oval Primary School (1 junior pitch) The Willclare Sports Society site and Paddock Drive (surplus education site) have been previously investigated for club ownership but objected to from local residents. This should be reviewed.

Y4 To improve facilities at Lyndon Playing Fields. This is a multi-pitch site (currently 6 pitches) without

access to changing rooms. Pitches are currently rated as average. Funding would need to be secured to deliver improvements.

Y5 To improve facilities at King Georges V Memorial field. This is a multi-pitch site (currently 4 pitches)

without access to changing rooms. Pitches are currently rated as average. Funding would need to be secured to deliver improvements.



Y6 Some pitch re-designation could also be considered at the above sites – i.e. marking out for junior and mini in place of some of the adult provision. This fits with an overall principle of managing assets more effectively to deliver impact. Local clubs would need to be involved in discussions.

Y7 Facilities at the Ackers Recreation Ground and Open Space (near but not part of the Ackers Trust) are in

need of considerable improvement folliwng significant external investment in a pavilion, pitches and multi-use games area. Management and maintenance are key issues that need to be rsolved to enable better sporting community use for both cricket and football. Due to its location the site serves local wards in other constituencies. It may be that the community sports hub model could be used to develop this site and engage local groups and the community in the site.

Y8 Silveremere Road is a land locked site that was a former City Council education establishment

It’s playing fields are of poor quality, and have not been used some for some considerable time and here is now no changing accomodation. The site can only cater for a junior pitch and possibly a mini pitch.

There is a significant quality problem in the Yardley constituency and given the specific site restraints, it has been accepted that if the Silvermere site is disposed of, the capital receipt for the playing field land, could be applied to provide qualitative improvements in the vicinity e.g. to the Gilberstone Road and/or King George’s V Playing fields

Cricket Cricket provision is currently assessed to be adequate with a small surplus, although potentially more provision in the area would allow further development of the BCL. Any theoretical surplus is likely to reduce in the future. Six pitches accessible for community use have been identified in the area, with 5 rated positively. Recommendations are: Y9 To investigate the development of changing room provision at Gilberstone Recreation Ground – this site

currently serves football and cricket. The cricket squares should also be improved - there are 2 cricket pitches in use by the BCL. A detailed technical report should be commissioned.

Rugby There is an apparent deficiency of pitches in Yardley. Birmingham Civil Service, Birmingham Wyvern and Birmingham Exiles all attract players from this Constituency area. This demand is met currently through clubs accessing provision outside of the city. However: Y10 Birmingham Civil Service are currently playing their games at the Land Rover Sports Club (out of city) but

prior to this were currently seeking a site in Sheldon – it is recommended that support is provided as appropriate in the future to secure a relocation to the city should this be the Club’s preferred option.

Hockey The deficiency in Yardley is attributable to Yardley Hockey Club playing ‘out of area’. The club accesses the facility at Small Heath Leisure Centre in Ladywood. It is recommended that: Y11 If an opportunity arises then an AGP for hockey should be developed in the Yardley area. Priority site summary The priority sites for investment in the Yardley area are:

1. Oaklands Recreation Ground 2. Gilberstone Recreation Ground



3. Lyndon Playing Fields 4. King George V Memorial Field

Impact of recommendations on assessment (quantity) results The overriding quantitative deficiencies (i.e. shortages in pitch numbers) relate predominantly to football and cricket. The recommendations made include bringing into play under-utilised provision. If all recommendations are delivered then there is the potential to make the following impact: Football (city wide, future demand estimates) • Increase the accessible supply of mini soccer pitches by around 26 pitches. This would increase supply to

47 pitches, reducing the theoretical deficiency city wide to -38 (from -64). This does not take into account the potential for some re-designation of pitches resulting from a surplus in adult pitches

• Increase the accessible supply of junior football pitches by around 24 pitches. This would increase supply to 93 pitches, reducing the theoretical deficiency city wide to -46 (from -70). This does not take into account the potential for some re-designation of pitches resulting from a surplus in adult pitches

• Increase the accessible supply of adult pitches by around 48 pitches. This would increase supply to 244 pitches, increasing the surplus to +67. This surplus, if possible to re-designate, could in theory make up the remaining deficits in mini soccer (38 pitches) and junior (46 pitches). Re-designating 46 of the surplus adult pitches would leave around 21 adult pitches (able to potentially accommodate the 38 mini soccer pitches).

Cricket (city wide, future demand estimates) • Increase the accessible supply of cricket pitches by around 7 pitches. This could help alleviate the

overplaying of some pitches and allow some latent demand to be accommodated, particularly in relation to the BCL.

Priority Investment Sites - Summary The table below provides a summary of immediate priorities for investment or sourcing funding. This is based on prioritisation of multi-pitch sites, improving the usability and capacity of sites (effective management) and maximising funding (particularly where there are current opportunities). The lack of Ladywood sites in the table is not a reflection of this area being a low priority – it is an indication that key public multi-pitch sites are lacking in this area. Other sites are highlighted within the recommendations as requiring investment. These require action in the short term to ensure they progress. A number of these require further exploration in relation to ownership and lease details to determine an appropriate investment solution. Priority Sites

Recommendation and Site Constituency Area

Key Improvements and Rationale Additional Comments

Immediate priorities – some funding in place PB1 & PB5: Holford Drive

Perry Barr

Multi-Pitch multi sport site. Pitch improvements (drainage) and changing room provision. Site for football and cricket and other sports

Part of site sold and part of receipt allocated for community sport and site improvements.Cabinet has agreed that this site be a priority for a model multi-sport community sports hub development, with a community asset transfer.





ER4: Farnborough Road

Erdington

Multi Pitch Site for football. Quality improvements and potential to re-instate AGP provision (subject to outcome of AGP Strategy)

106 monies available and partnership funding secured. Needs further exploration by BCC. Short term priority for FA.

SC2: Rectory Park

Sutton Coldfield

Multi Pitch Site for football. Key site used by around 8 clubs. Potential for 6-7 pitches but improvements needed for these to be brought into play. Changing room refurbishment required.

Some potential funding secured to improve the site.

SO1: Pebble Mill Site

Selly Oak

(Potential) Multi Pitch multi sport site. Site not currently in use for sport so would provide additional quantity, much needed for e.g. rugby

Monies available via Section 106. Clarification needed on inclusion of other sports and latest status of site master-plan. Some funding may be needed.

SC4: Wishaw Lane

Sutton Coldfield

Multi Pitch Site for football. Site is also close to Erdington and improvements could help improve the offer for teams from this area. Adult and Junior football on site. Drainage works needed and changing rooms.

Potential for external funding

Y3: Oaklands Recreation Ground

Yardley

Multi Pitch Site for football. Potential 6 pitch site, no on site changing rooms. Pitches average quality. Potential for link with use of nearby community centre (Holder Road).

Options/site master-plan required but potentially Section 106 monies available

Priorities dependent upon funding HG4 & HG5: Holders Lane

Hall Green

Multi Pitch multi sport site. Master-plan in development. Scheme could include football, cricket and rugby. Changing rooms a priority.

High Priority for both FA and ECB University College Birmngham interested in site. Strong potential for a community sports hub approach and CAT





PB2 & PB6: Perry Hall Park

Perry Barr

Multi Pitch multi sport site. Cricket and Football. Main venue for BCL and also accommodates a number of football pitches. Potential for additional cricket pitches to be brought into play and changing room facilities needed.

Funding would need to be found. Highest priority action for ECB in Cricket Facilities Strategy.

SO5 & SO5: Billesley Common

Selly Oak

Multi Pitch multi sport site. Rugby and Cricket, but with potential for the FA to be involved (target area for delivery). Key venue for a number of Rugby Clubs (matches and training) and to service the BCL. Some issues with pitch quality and a technical appraisal needed to identify remedial works.

Funding would need to be found to supplement funding to develop the Moseley RFC stadium.

ER4 & ER5 Spring Lane

Erdington

Multi Pitch multi sport site. Quality improvements needed, Changing rooms and potential AGP. Football and Cricket Use with potential for other sports

Partnership approach needed, potential for a community sports hub and a potential CAT. Funding would need to be found.

HH4: MEB site (Green Lane)

Hodge Hill

Multi Pitch multi sport site Changing rooms and pitch development works needed. Site fairly compact but could serve as a site for a community sports hub

Funding would need to be found. Currently licenced to a local community organisation that could be developed into a community sports hub.

N2 & N7: Cofton Park

Northfield

Multi Pitch multi sport site. Potential to provide improved facilities for football and cricket. Changing rooms a priority

Funding would need to be found but potential as part of Longbridge Area Action Plan. Discussion needed re: value for the site for cricket as it falls outside catchment of the BCL

E2: Sennelleys Park

Edgbaston

Multi Pitch Site for football. Quality improvements, particularly changing rooms which have some recent investment but could be further improved. Target for FA delivery.

Feasibility Study has been commissioned, but funding would need to be found





N4: Kings Norton Playing Fields

Northfield

Multi Pitch Site for football. Up to 7 pitches currently on site (adult, junior, mini) – all average quality and no high quality changing facilities

Funding would need to be found.

HG4 & HG5: Queensbridge Playing Fields

Hall Green

Multi Pitch multi sport site. Currently football, cricket and Gaelic Football on site.

Funding would need to be found. Discussion needed re: Gaelic football. Longer term priority

PB5: Burford Road

Perry Barr

Multi Pitch Site for football. Up to 4 pitches currently on site (adult, junior) – all average quality and no changing facilities


SO2: Yardley Wood Playing Fields

Selly Oak

Multi Pitch Site for football. 4 pitches currently, but average quality and no changing facilities.


SC3: Breamar Road

Sutton Coldfield

Multi Pitch Site for football. Used by three different clubs. Pitches overused and of average quality. Changing rooms do not include showers.


SC5 Sutton Coldfield RFC

Sutton Coldfield RFC has been defined as at capacity and is located in a high participation ward. There is a need here for one additional pitch on site and development of training floodlights

Funding needed

HH5Belchers Lane

Hodge Hill

(Potential) Multi Pitch multi sport site Potential to develop cricket academy, within this high

Funding would need to be found. The site has strong current interest from a number of partners including





demand area. Site currently in non use.

Waverley School and has the potential to become a multi-sport community sports hub.

L6 Holloway Head Ladywood Artificial Grass Pitch - Technical study of site be commissioned including conditions, and potential funding be produced to investigate potential for a floodlit artifical grass pitch and associated accommodation.

Potential funding from Lottery, Football Foundation and others. Ties into AGP strategy recommendations. Study could be widened to cover the whole constituency and environs to identify the potenitla and costs of short term and longer term solutions.

N3: The Hayes

Northfield

(Potential) Multi Pitch Site for football depending on the outcome of a further technical feasibility study to assess the extent of drainage issues

Funding would need to be found. Link to Wast Hills in a masterplan approach

Y4: Lyndon Playing Fields

Yardley

Multi Pitch Site for football. Currently a 6 pitch site without access to changing rooms. Pitches are average

Longer term – not a target area for FA delivery. Funding would need to be found.

Y5: King Georges V Memorial Fund

Yardley

Multi Pitch Site for football. Currently a 4 pitch site without access to changing rooms. Pitches are average

Longer term – not a target area for FA delivery. Funding would need to be found.

Y9: Gilberstone Recreation Ground

Yardley

Multi Pitch site for football and cricket. Changing and cricket and football pitch improvements

Funding would need to be found Currently used by BCL

playing pitch strategy final report

Documents